Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Master Thesis submitted within the UNIGIS MSc. programme
at the Department of Geoinformatics - Z_GIS
University of Salzburg, Austria
under the provisions of UNIGIS India framework
Designing Local Spatial Data Infrastructure
Framework for Municipalities A Case Study of Northern Borders Municipality, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
by
Mohamed Ali Abdallah Ali ID: GIS-104644
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of
the degree of
Master of Science (Geographical Information Science & Systems) – MSc (GISc)
Advisor (s):
DR. SHAHNAWAZ
Interfaculty Department for Geoinformatics - Z_GIS
University of Salzburg, Austria
Arar, KSA March 2019
1
Science Pledge
By my signature below, I certify that my project report is entirely the result of my own work.
I have cited all sources of information and data I have used in my project report and
indicated their origin.
Arar, Saudi Arabia, 22 March 2019
Place and Date Signature
2
Acknowledgements:
At the outset, I thank Allah for his kindness and blessings, And I would like to send
my deep thanks and gratitude to the immaculate soul of my father who made his life
for my refinement, education and personal development, A greeting of longing,
thanks and pride for you, Dad.
I am grateful to my supervisor, Dr. Shahnawaz, for his guidance, flexibility and
support me, I have benefited greatly from his experiences throughout my long study
journey, with all the meanings of sincerity and gratitude I would like to say thank
you Dr. Shahnawaz. Also, I would like to say thanks to all the instructors throughout
the study period. Finally, I would like to say thanks to my family, thanks to my wife
for her patience and emotional and intellectual support.
Mohamed Ali,
3
Abstract:
The local government and the municipal sector in particular produce and use a vast amount
of spatial information, So improving the geographic information systems (GIS) practices in
local government is critical in providing efficient government services, decision support and
promoting sustainable development. More than ever, the local government urgently need
Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) to share and exchange data, internal operation, eliminate
duplication of data and access data from multiple sources under the standardization
umbrella, Which will reflect positively on the national economy and growth of investment
and business. Assessing the current status of GIS practices is the first step required to
develop improvement plans and design the framework for implementation of local SDI, Any
action outside this framework will be a loss of the accumulated investment in previous
projects in GIS.
This research focused on the assessment of GIS practices in the municipalities as a first
step to move to spatial data infrastructure (SDI ) in local government (The Northern Borders
Municipality-NBM in Saudi Arabia ) as a case study. The approach of case studies and
surveys were used, Data were collected through interviews, questionnaires, and
observations. The research was based on several data analysis tools such as GIS
Capability Maturity Model ( GISCMM ), GAP Analysis and SWOT Analysis.
The findings of the GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) assessment of NBM indicate
that a moderate status with average 0.52 (In progress but with only partial resources
available ) for the components of GIS Enabling Capability (EC) assessment. But the
assessment of the components of Execution Ability (EA), the ratings were generally low, It
is one of the most important weaknesses revealed by findings of GISCMM in NBM GIS
unit. Where components were rated at a low level ( Level One: Ad-hoc processes and
Level Two: Repeatable processes) included 16 components which represent about 74% of
the total EA assessment components. According to the municipal data catalogue gap
analysis, the results indicate that 22 features from 78 features (total fundamental datasets)
representing 28% of the total fundamental data are missing data. In addition, there is a loss
4
of attribute data as well as a lot of metadata missing which are necessary for the
implementation of municipal SDI, Where the percentage of missing metadata is 60% of the
total fundamental datasets. According to GIS SWOT Analysis and analysis of the findings
of questionnaires and interviews indicate that there is a big problem that the municipal GIS
is unplanned, where the GIS practices in the NBM lack a strategic plan and a objectives
business plan with a time plan. This problem is related to the problem of the absence of a
specific organizational structure for the GIS unit and the lack of professional GIS staff, The
municipality has also not developed a sustainable training plan to raise the professional
level of the GIS team or the users training plan. In contrast, the municipality had strengths
in IT infrastructure, spatial data and software availability. Also, the findings indicate that
government agencies, in general, are not ready to be integrated into the local government
with the municipality. The integration may be gradually agency-by-agency, despite the
modest evaluations of some GIS components of NBM it is the most powerful government
agency in the Northern Borders Region in terms of GIS practices in spatial data, IT
infrastructure, financial and human resources, and previous experiences.
The research presented its recommendations regarding future studies and practices as
follows:
o The GIS Capability Maturity Model ( GISCMM ) should be a component of GIS practices
in municipalities and government agencies.
o The results of the GIS's practices assessment, strengths and weaknesses should be
taken into account in the development of the municipal geospatial strategic plan.
o The research recommended that develop programs within a strategic plan to raise
awareness of the benefits of using spatial information.
o Improving this research more and applying it to other municipalities and government
agencies.
o Recommend further researches to address more individually detailed topics: Role of
geospatial strategic plans in achieving development, Operational framework of local SDI
and Metadata role in local/municipal SDI.
5
Table of Contents
Science Pledge ……………………………………………………………………………...
Acknowledgments …………………………….……………………………………………
Abstract…………………………………………..…………………………………………...
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………..
List of Figures ………….……………………………………………………………………
List of Acronyms .…………………………………………………………………………..
Chapter-1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………
1.1. Background ………………………………………………………………...
1.2. Literature Review ………………………………………………………….
1.3. Motivation……………………………………………………….................
1.4. Aim And Objectives ………………………………………………………..
1.5. Research questions ……………………………………………………….
1.6. Organization of thesis ……………………………………………………..
Chapter-2. Methodology …………………………………………………………………..
2.1. Methodology ………………………………………………………………..
2.2. Data Collecting …………………………………………………………….
2.2.1. Interviews……………………………………………………….........
2.2.2. Questionnaires ………………………………………………….…...
2.2.3. Observations …………………………………………………..........
2.3. Data Analysis ……………………………………………………………...
2.3.1. GIS Maturity Model ( GISCMM ) ……………………………..
2.3.2. Data Catalogue GAP Analysis ………………………………..
2.3.3. GIS SWOT Analysis ……………………………………………
Chapter-3. Assessment of GIS Practices ………………………………………………..
3.1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………
3.1.1. Definition of Geographic Information System (GIS) …………….
3.1.2. GIS structure and elements ………………………………………..
3.1.3. GIS application in Local Government ……………………………..
3.1.4. The motivation for GIS's Practices Assessment …………………
3.2. The Northern Borders Municipality as a case study……………………
3.3. GIS Assessment in Northern Borders Municipality ( Case Study)……
1
2
3
5
8
8
10
11
11
12
13
16
16
17
19
19
19
19
19
21
21
22
22
22
23
23
24
25
26
27
28
31
6
3.3.1. GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) …………………........
3.3.1.1. Benefits of GIS Capability Maturity (GISCMM) ……….
3.3.1.2. GISCMM Components and Assessment Categories …
3.3.2. Performing GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) ………….
3.3.2.1. Questionnaires and Interviews Analysis………………..
3.3.2.2. Performing of (GISCMM) ………………………………..
3.4. Findings …………………………………………………………………….
3.4.1. GIS Enabling Capability Assessment ……………………………..
3.4.2. GIS Execution Ability Assessment ………………………………...
3.4.3. Summary of NBM GIS Unit Assessment ………………………….
Chapter-4. Spatial Data Infrastructure …………………………………………………
4.1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………
4.2. Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Concepts ……………………………..
4.2.1.SDI Definition …………………………………………………………
4.2.2.SDI Components …………………………………………………….
4.2.3.SDI Hierarchy ………………………………………………………...
4.3. The Motivations for SDI Development in local government ……........
4.4. Local / Municipal SDI Model ……………………………………………..
31
31
33
35
35
36
39
39
50
53
56
56
56
56
57
58
59
60
Chapter-5. The Opportunities of Transition to Local SDI …………………………...
5.1. Overview ……………………………………………………………………
5.2. Data Catalogue GAP Analysis in Northern Borders Municipality …….
5.2.1. Introduction …………………………………………………….........
5.2.2. Fundamental Data …………………………………………….........
5.2.3. Performing Data Catalogue GAP Analysis ……………………….
5.2.4. Findings ………………………………………………………………
5.3. GIS SWOT Analysis in The Northern Borders Municipality …………..
5.3.1. Introduction …………………………………………………………..
5.3.2. GISCMM Results Analysis …………………………………………
5.3.3. Questionnaires and interviews Analysis …………………………..
5.3.3.1. Municipal Departments/ Branches Questionnaire …….
5.3.3.2. Government Agencies Questionnaire ………………….
5.3.3.3. SWOT Questionnaire …………………………………….
5.3.4. Performing of GIS SWOT Analysis ………………………….........
5.4. Findings Discussion And Recommendations …………………………..
5.4.1. Findings discussion …………………………………………………
63
63
63
63
63
66
69
71
71
71
73
74
80
84
89
92
92
7
5.4.2. Recommendations …………………………………………………..
Chapter-6. Conclusions …………………………………………………………………...
References …………………………………………………………………………………..
Appendix ………………………………………………………….………………………….
A. Part of Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model Questionnaire ……………….
B. Part of Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model Questionnaire Extension …..
C. Data Catalogue of The Northern Borders Municipality ………………………….
D. Interviews Schedule …………………………………………………………………
E. Government Agencies Questionnaire ……………………………………………..
F. Municipal Departments/ branches Questionnaire ………………………………..
G. SWOT Questionnaire ……………………………………………………………….
H. Arar City Geo-explorer and Municipal Geo-Applications ………………………..
I. ISO 19100 Geographic Information Standards ……………………………………
94
99
101
106
106
108
110
115
116
122
127
130
131
8
List of Tables
Table 3.1 The maturity levels in GIS Capability Maturity Model ………………………..
Table 3.2 Assessment categories according to the modified maturity model by GIM
Table 3.3 Individual enabling capability component assessment ……………………...
Table 3.4 Individual framework GIS data and data maintenance. EC ratings…………
Table 3.5 Individual Business GIS data and data maintenance. EC ratings…………..
Table 3.6. Individual execution ability components assessment ………………………..
Table 4.1 Relations between different level of SDIs (Rajabifard 2001) ……………….
Table 5.1 Cornerstones datasets in the INSPIRE directive …………………………….
Table 5.2 Summarized list of fundamental datasets according to the previous study
by (Farah & Ottichilo, 2006) via (Rautenbach 2015) ……………………………............
Table 5.3 The list of fundamental datasets by (Rautenbach 2015) ……………………
Table 5.4 The summary of the GAP Analysis ……………………………………………
33
34
40
44
47
50
62
64
65
66
67
List of Maps
Map 3.1 Location of Northern Borders Municipality in Saudi Arabia …………………..
Map 3.2 Northern Borders Municipality, Satellite View ………………………………….
28
28
List of Figures
Figure 3.1 Components of geographic information system (GIS) ………....................
Figure 3.2 The organizational structure of the municipal IT department ………...........
Figure 3.3 The local government GIS Capability Maturity Model ………......................
Figure 3.4 Characteristics of maturity model ……………………………........................
Figure 3.5 Summary of The Enabling Capability component assessment of The NBM
Figure 3.6 Summary of the Framework GIS Data assessment of the NBM GIS …….
Figure 3.7 Summary of the Business GIS Data assessment of the NBM GIS ……….
Figure 3.8 Summary of the Execution Ability component assessment of The NBM …
Figure 3.9 Summary of the Enabling Capability components assessment of the NBM
GIS …………………………………………………………………………………………….
Figure 3.10 Summary of GIS Data Resources assessment in NBM GIS Unit ………..
Figure 3.11 Summary of the Execution Ability components assessment of The NBM
Figure 4.1 Nature and relations between SDI components (adapted from Rajabifard
26
30
32
35
43
47
49
52
53
54
55
9
and Williamson, 2001)………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 4.2 SDI Hierarchy ( Adapted from Rajabifard and Williamson, 2001) …………
Figure 4.3 Product and Process-Based Models for SDI development (Rajabifard and
Williamson 2001) ……………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 4.4 Organizational structure for SDI hierarchy (Rajabifard, 2001) …………….
Figure 5.1: Summary of the missing data in the NBM data catalogue …………………
Figure 5.2: Summary ratings of GIS Enabling Capability components for the NBM …
Figure 5.3: Summary ratings of GIS Execution Ability components for The NBM ……
Figure 5.4: The level of awareness of GIS ………………………………………………..
Figure 5.5: Satisfaction with the state of IT infrastructure ……………………………….
Figure 5.6: Spatial data at departments …………………………………………………...
Figure 5.7: Available metadata ……………………………………………………………..
Figure 5.8: Spatial data required from government agencies …………………………..
Figure 5.9: How to get spatial data …………………………………………………………
Figure 5.10: The difficulties related to spatial data ……………………………………….
Figure 5.11: Geo-applications required ……………………………………………………
Figure 5.12: Availability of metadata ……………………………………………………….
Figure 5.13: Satisfaction with the state of IT infrastructure ……………………………..
Figure 5.14: Using the Spatial data software …………………………………………..
Figure 5.15: Spatial data required from other government agencies …………………..
Figure 5.16: The difficulties related to spatial data ……………………………………….
Figure 5.17: Responses of question 1 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.18: Responses of question 2 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.19: Responses of question 3 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.20: Responses of question 4 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.21: Responses of question 5 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.22: Responses of question 6 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.23: Responses of question 7 ……………………………………………………..
Figure 5.24: SWOT Analysis Framework ………………………………………………….
58
58
61
62
70
72
72
74
75
76
76
77
78
78
79
80
81
81
82
83
84
85
86
86
87
88
88
89
10
List of Acronyms
CAD Computer-Aided Design
CMM Capability Maturity Model
EC Enabling Capability
EA Execution Ability
FGDC Federal Geographic Data Committee
GIS Geographic information systems
GISCMM GIS Capability Maturity Model
GMI USRIA’s GIS Management Institute
INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community
IT Information Technology
MOMRA Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs
NBM Northern Borders Municipality
NSDI National Spatial Data Infrastructure
ROI Return on Investment
SDI Spatial Data Infrastructure
SWOT Strengths-Opportunities-Weaknesses-Threats
USRIA Urban and Regional Information Systems Association
11
Chapter-1: Introduction
1.1. Background
We are living in an age of tremendous information, with the pace of innovation and
creativity accelerating. Local governments must quickly integrate into this age and take
advantage of the vast amount of information to solve their problems. They must adopt new
ideas and plans with a comprehensive vision that enables them to deliver high-quality
government services. This will only happen by assessing previous experiences internally
and externally, taking advantage of the pros, addressing the negatives and developing a
plan for future steps and objectives.
Using of geographic information systems (GIS) is a critical factor in the efficient delivery of
government services, as comprehensive and updated spatial information will increase the
efficiency of urban land administration, natural resource management, transportation
facilities, utility services, risk management, and statistical information to support decision
making. To achieve this, GIS must be transformed from the separate projects and isolated
data silos into a spatial data infrastructure (SDI) that allows for interoperability and
exchange of information among all government agencies. According to the Federal
Geographic Data Committee, Spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) consisting of policies,
standards, and procedures aim to provide an environment that encourages co-operation in
data production and sharing (FGDC 2000; Rajabifard, Williamson et al. 2000). The
improvement of GIS practices in local government and the transition to SDI will maximize
the use of spatial information and increase the use of GIS and also increase the users
base, As Majeed (2018) points that the government with SDI enabling would identify
opportunities for innovative uses of geospatial information technologies in local, state and
federal levels (Majeed 2018).
12
1.2. Literature Review
In the underlying literature review, Several studies and previous research have examined
the assessment of GIS in local governments to identify strengths, weaknesses and develop
a strategic plan for improvement of GIS and local SDI.
Majeed (2018) published a scientific paper aimed to demonstrate that by developing and
implementing SDI the use of GIS in government agencies at local, state and federal levels
can be improved and extended, the paper examined GIS in Malaysia. McDougall et al.
(2002) investigated some of the technical and institutional impediments that must be
addressed within Australian local and state jurisdictions in order to realize SDI benefits.
Salvemini (2004) presented his vision for designing a path for the local government to
move from GIS to SDI. O‟Flaherty et al. (2005) Presented a study which focused on the
deployment of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Spatial Data Infrastructures
(SDI) within local government in Thai Provinces. Vries (2006) took a closer look at why the
processes of information production, dissemination and exchange are not sufficiently
effective at the local level. Leong et al. (2008) identified the important factors which
determine the success and failure of GIS implementation through the analysis of case
studies in Asia And analyze the local situation of current GIS usage in Luang Prabang of
Lao PDR. Smit et al. (2009) presented at what appears to be an alternative SDI
development paradigm. The focus is on the vertical institutional relationships that exist
between the Provincial government and Local Authorities within the Western Cape province
of South Africa. the research aimed to evaluate whether a hierarchical top-down approach
truly exists or whether SDI in the province is more a result of a bricolage of bottom-up
activity. Hickel and Blankenbach (2012) discussed the solution for a cost-efficient local
Spatial Data Infrastructure (local SDI) with the aim of capacity building and technical
development of SDI components in municipalities in the south of Hesse, Germany. Saputra
(2011) conducted a study on a model of spatial data infrastructure for the local government
level and its implementation to support e-government applications based on GIS. using the
13
case study area of Depok City Government in Indonesia. McDougall, et al. (2009)
published an article on exploring local government SDI within Australia to assess its
capacity to contribute to higher level SDI initiatives. And a comprehensive survey of over
100 local government authorities was undertaken to assess their SDI capacity and
collaborative initiatives. Using a single case study of a local government in Bekasi in
Indonesia. Ramadhan et al. (2011) Presented a study to assesses the implementation of
GIS in the e-Government system provided by ninety-one institutions in Indonesia. Jomar
(2018) presented a study to determine the Geographic Information System (GIS)
capabilities of the Local Government Units In the seventeen LGUs of the Province of La
Union that utilises a GIS in the Philippines, Alrwais et al. (2015) Presented a maturity model
for evaluating local government usage of GIS, The study applied widely tested on Southern
California local governments through an online questionnaire. Kurwakumire ( 2014)
presented a public sector GIS evaluation methodology, In order to determine whether GIS
systems are meeting their intended objectives, In public sector organizations in Uganda.
In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kubara (2002) presented a study which focused on
evaluating the use of GIS in Saudi Arabia. A questionnaire was mailed to a total of 80
agencies to evaluate the use of hardware, operating software, application software, data,
maps, and personnel. The study recommended that GIS standards and specifications are
so urgently needed in order to use available GIS properly ( Kubara 2002 ).
Al-Ramadan (2013) presented research which about Assessment of GIS Adoption in Saudi
Arabia (Obstacles and Challenges), The research discussed the challenges related to the
lack of leadership, coordination and lack of spatial data, And recommended increase
awareness of GIS and secure human resources in GIS (Al-Ramadan 2013).
1.3. Motivation
More than ever, the local government urgently need SDI to exchange and sharing data,
operate internally, eliminate duplication of data and access data from multiple sources
under the standardization umbrella, Which will reflect positively on the national economy
14
and growth of investment and business. SDI crucial role was confirmed in supporting the
economy and promoting business in both private and public sectors all over the world at
global, regional, national and local levels (Genovese et al. 2009). A hierarchical move from
the bottom up ( from Local to National/Global ) in investing in spatial information will lead to
sustainability and thus to economic benefits, many countries believe they can benefit both
economically and environmentally from better management of their spatial information by
taking a perspective that starts at a local level and proceeds through state, national and
regional levels to a global level (Rajabifard and Williamson 2001).
Local SDI is not so good in most countries of the world except for some developed
countries, although Local SDI is the base of the pyramid for operational operations and risk
management, Also is the closest hand to updating and maintaining of data, but global
attention has been directed to state/national SDI, The result is that in many cases local
government does not use the state SDI. Although local government is responsible for
controlling or maintaining the integrity of specific land-related data in the state/national SDI
(Jacoby, et al. 2002). However, the development of national SDI policy has been less than
inclusive of all of the jurisdictional participants with a particularly low level of participation at
the local government level (McDougall et al. 2005).
At the level of local government in Saudi Arabia within the vision of the Kingdom 2030,
which aims to achieve sustainable urban development and balanced to improve the quality
of life, Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (MOMRA) issued a decision to form a
guidance committee to study the current situation and the future need for the components
of the spatial information infrastructure (SDI) of the municipal sector (Ministry of Municipal
and Rural Affairs. MOMRA). The most important responsibilities of the Committee are:
o Supervise the assessment of spatial information databases, standards and policies
used, and current technologies and human resources in the municipal sector.
o Study how to minimize data duplication.
o Develop a future vision for the sustainability and balance of urban development and
support the development of geo- applications in the municipal sector.
15
o Studying and evaluating methods of managing, exchanging and publishing spatial
information inside and outside the municipal sector.
o Supervising the ability of the participants in urban planning to access the spatial
information infrastructure (SDI) of the municipal sector.
At the national level, Saudi Arabia issued decision No. 388 dated 27/10/2010 transforming
the Interim Committee for Unifying Standards and General Principles of the requirements of
establishing the National Geographic Information System (GIS) into a permanent
committee called (National Committee For Geographic Information System). The most
important decision objectives were the establishment of the SDI program according to the
latest national and global standards and specifications, the preparation of the vision, the
objective, the detailed tasks, organizational structure, the human and financial resources of
the GIS program, Unifying of GIS standards and technical specifications at the level of
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia ( National Committee For Geographic Information System NSDI).
This research will focus on the assessment of geographic information systems ( GIS )
practices in the municipalities as a first step to move to spatial data infrastructure (SDI ) in
the local government (The Northern Border Municipality-NBM) as a case study and
preliminary survey of GIS capabilities in some government agencies). Assessing the
current status and determining the maturity status of GIS in local government is an
essential step to develop a roadmap and framework to design and implement the SDI in
local government as well as to reap other gains from the assessment findings such as the
ability to develop a strategic plan to improve GIS practices based on the current status to
reduce the waste of funds, And help decision-makers to prioritize and promote needed GIS
projects. Once strengths and weaknesses are identified, Then directing the projects
towards needs. SDI's growth and completeness come through successive steps, projects
and accumulated efforts in GIS. Local public spatial data management is an engine for the
development of SDI (McDougall et al. 2009).
16
1.4. Aim And Objectives
Research Aim:
The overall aim of this research is assessing the current status of maturity of geographic
information systems (GIS ) in the Northern Borders Municipality to identify opportunities for
transition to local spatial data infrastructure (SDI) and identify the most important
challenges that may hinder the transformation and how to overcome them.
Research Objectives:
The following objectives were identified to achieve the overall aim:
Assessing the current status of geographic information systems (GIS ) in the Northern
Borders Municipality in terms of spatial datasets, IT infrastructure, human resources,
standards, and policies.
Verify the readiness of government agencies to implement local SDI or participate as
gradually in Municipal SDI.
Define the characteristics and benefits of municipal spatial data infrastructure (SDI).
Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the current status of GIS in the Northern
Borders Municipality.
Identification of the opportunities and challenges of transition to municipal SDI.
Providing the recommendations that help overcome challenges and support the
transition to the SDI in the Northern Borders Municipality.
1.5. Research Questions
To achieve the research objectives the following research questions have to be answered
in this research.
17
What is the current status ( maturity level ) of the Geographic Information System (GIS)
in the Northern Borders Municipality?
What are the characteristics of SDI?
What are the benefits or motives of the municipal/ local SDI?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of GIS in the Northern Borders Municipality?
What are the opportunities for the transition to SDI in the Northern Borders
Municipality?
What are the challenges of moving from GIS to municipal SDI?
What are the steps or recommendations that boost opportunities for the transition to
SDI in the Northern Borders Municipality?
1.6. Organization of Thesis
This research is divided into six chapters and we can report the thesis structure as follows:
Chapter One: Introduction
The first chapter presents background on the topic, including literature review and research
motivation, as well as research aim and objectives and research questions.
Chapter Two: Methodology
This chapter clarifies the methodology, methods of data collecting and data analysis tools.
Chapter Three: Assessment of GIS Practices
In this chapter, the performance of the GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) and the
findings of the municipal assessment are presented.
Chapter Four: Spatial Data Infrastructure
This chapter covers concepts of Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI), characteristic of Local /
Municipal SDI and the motivations for SDI development in local government.
Chapter Five: The Opportunities of Transition to Local SDI
18
This chapter including performing of Data Catalogue GAP Analysis and GIS SWOT
Analysis, It also discusses the findings and provides practice recommendations.
Chapter Six: Conclusions
This chapter delivers conclusions and recommendations for future practices and
researches.
19
Chapter-2: Methodology
2.1. Methodology:
The method approach which will apply in this study is case studies and surveys. This
methodology was chosen because the research addresses a modern issue which actually
occurs in real, One from cases can be studied covering aspects of investigation and
research. The methods of data collecting are interviews, questionnaires, and observations.
2.2. Data Collecting :
Data will be obtained through interviews, questionnaires, and observations according to the
following context:
2.2.1. Interviews
Several interviews will be held and the general focus will be on GIS-SDI in the municipality.
Other points such as financial resources, priorities of upper management in spatial data
investment, awareness of benefits and uses of spatial data will be discussed by asking
questions and listening to the views of participants, Issues and questions will vary by
interview group and agency, the target groups for interviews will be:
Manager of Information Technology department and Specialists and responsible for
the GIS unit in the Municipality.
Departments and branches managers in the municipality.
Consultants and project managers related to GIS.
Specialists and responsible for spatial data in some government agencies.
2.2.2. Questionnaires
Four questionnaires will be used and direct questions will be asked during the interviews.
One questionnaire will be published on the Internet to obtain the required information.
Each questionnaire will be used with a specific role for measurement and data collection.
The questionnaires were carefully prepared in terms of selecting, arranging and formulating
20
the questions to achieve objectivity, avoiding bias and encouraging unreserved response in
order to obtain the data required for the study. Three questionnaires were written in Arabic.
The fourth questionnaire was the maturity model questionnaire, which was drafted in
English, where there was no need to translate it into Arabic because it was addressed to
specialists in GIS. The following questionnaires were used:
GISCMM Questionnaire
In this questionnaire, USRIA‟s GIS Management Institute (GMI) modified Capability
Maturity Model (CMM) questions in 2013 will be used ( USRIA), covering all aspects of
enabling capability and execution ability of municipal GIS. The questionnaire will be filled
during the interview with the IT group, specialists and officials of the GIS unit in the
municipality. The questionnaire aims at measuring the maturation of the GIS practices in
the municipality. The results of data analysis will reveal the strengths and weaknesses of
the GIS in the municipality.
Municipal Departments/ Branches Questionnaire
This questionnaire will be aimed at internal department and branches managers of the
municipality (case study), which provides services to people and requires spatial data in the
implementation of their tasks. The questionnaire will be filled during the interview with this
group. The questionnaire aims to obtain data on the type of spatial data they need to carry
out their tasks from the municipality GIS unit or from other agencies as well as the spatial
data they already have or produce. The questions will also cover many aspects to measure
the readiness of the departments for the interoperability of spatial data.
Government Agencies Questionnaire
This questionnaire will target the specialists and those responsible for spatial data in some
government agencies that provide services to people and require spatial data in the
implementation of their tasks (electricity, water, transport, etc.). The questionnaire will be
filled during the interview with this group.
21
The questionnaire aims to obtain information on the type of spatial data they need or
already have or produce, as well as to verify whether these agencies have GIS units and
how many staff they have, and then ask how these data are combined together in order to
spatial data infrastructure integration, Also what about standardized standards, policy
development, any office has more qualifications and capabilities to host SDI, how to
homogenize spatial data to be interoperable between agencies. It should be noted here
that the assessment of the status of GIS in government agencies will not be as
comprehensive and profound as in the municipality (case study), But data will be collected
to reveals the size of opportunities and challenges for SDI implementation in the
municipality for sharing data with other government service agencies.
SWOT Questionnaire
This questionnaire will target a wide range of GIS consultants, project managers, staff and
departments and branches manager of the municipality, The questionnaire will be
published online and sent the link to the target groups via e-mail and social media.
This questionnaire aims at surveying the strengths and weaknesses of the GIS in the
Municipality, as well as the available opportunities to build on them to improve GIS
practices in the municipality, also the challenges and difficulties in using GIS in the
municipality which hinder the interoperability for spatial data.
2.2.3. Observations
Monitoring and measuring the work environment in the municipality, including employee
awareness of the use of geographic information systems (GIS), procedures for
implementing transactions based on spatial data, Physical verification of municipality GIS
assets (IT infrastructure and software), and other observable and measurable events.
2.3. Data Analysis:
A set of data analysis tools will be used, which will provide qualitative and quantitative
results. These tools will analyze the data obtained through interviews, questionnaires, and
22
observations to get the results that achieve the objectives of the study. Data analysis tools
that will be used in the study are as follows:
2.3.1. GIS Capability Maturity Model ( GISCMM )
The GIS Capability Maturity Model is based on an assessment of both enabling capability
and execution ability. Briefly, the enabling capability can be thought of as the technology,
data, resources, and related infrastructure, Enabling capability includes GIS management
and professional staff. However, the ability (execution capability) of the staff to utilize the
enabling technology at its disposal is subject to a separate assessment as part of the
model (GMI). The analysis of the results of the GISCMM will be a strong and crucial basis
for assessing the current status of GIS in the municipality ( case study) and will reveal the
opportunities for transformation to SDI, Also will reveal the challenges to improvement and
progress in GIS practices in the municipality. Further details will be discussed in the context
of chapter three.
2.3.2. Data Catalogue GAP Analysis
GAP analysis will be performed on the ideal fundamental datasets which will be carefully
identified according to global data standards, previous best practices and internal needs
and the datasets available in the municipality data catalogue.
the results of GAP analysis for data catalogue will reveal the missing data and identify the
metadata gap. These results will be important in making recommendations related to
improving spatial data and metadata. Further details will be discussed in the context of
chapter five.
2.3.3. GIS SWOT Analysis
A SWOT Analysis is a strategic planning method used to evaluate the strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (challenges) as they relate to a topic. The results
of the SWOT analysis will be used to make recommendations in regards to improvement of
GIS in the municipality. Further details will be discussed in the context of chapter five.
23
Chapter-3: Assessment of GIS Practices
3.1. Introduction
GIS have started in the 1960s as a method for resources management in the Canadian
government led by Roger Tomlinson who was a pioneer in GIS ( Foresman 1998 ).
Since then, the GIS growth has increased over time, its uses have expanded, Also the
users base has expanded around the world.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has adopted the application of geographic information
systems (GIS) in many fields at the national and local levels since 1986, Since then, the
adoption of GIS has begun in many government agencies and the private sector.
At the national level, the Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (MOMRA) has been the first
government agency to adopt GIS since 1988, Its first project aimed at managing land
records through MOMRA‟s GIS projects in municipalities such as Urban and Regional
Planning Information System (URPIS) and Cadastral Information System (CIS).
The Ministry of Transport through a project GIS for Bridges Maintenance which started in
1996. and then the Ministry of Water and Electricity through Water and Sewer Directorates
of the Ministry which started its projects in Riyadh core area 2003. then the Ministry of
Education through GIS Project which started 2003, And then the ministries of interior and
General Authority of Tourism & Antiquities projects GIS at the national level (Al-Ramadan
2013).
At the local level, the Arriyadh Development Authority (ADA) has been the first government
agency to adopt GIS since 1986 And was able to present the first digital basemap to the
public at the local level in 2002 ( Digital Base Map of Riyadh,
http://www.arriyadhmap.com/ArriyadhMaps/pro/). The Royal Commission in Jubail started
GIS activities in 1994. Then the GIS projects were launched at the municipal level in 2003
in the municipalities of Riyadh, Dammam, and Makkah. There are also other experiences of
GIS adoption at the local level, where The King Faisal Specialist Hospital launched its
project ( GIS Project to track the spatial pattern of spread of cancer). And the Hasa
24
Irrigation and Drainage Authority (HIDA) was launched the first phase of building the base
map of the agricultural oasis with the help of UN FAO in 2004 (FAO Water Reports 34,
2008).
The private sector has also made good contributions to the use of GIS in Saudi Arabia. The
Saudi Electricity Company started company-wide GIS project, The project covered most
areas of the Kingdom and the company in the continuous progress in the provision of
services based on spatial data. ARAMCO, one of the world's largest oil companies, is
implementing the ARAMCO e-Map Project, which began in 2001. Also, the Saudi
Telecommunication Company carried out the GIS project to geo-reference mobile towers
(Al-Ramadan 2013).
3.1.1. Definition of Geographic Information System (GIS)
The definitions of geographic information systems ( GIS ) differs somewhat from person to
person and from institution to institution depending on the prior understanding or mental
visualization for each of them to the GIS, also vary the definitions according to the
professional background and fields of specialization in GIS. Definitions also differ over time
for several reasons, the most important evolution of the techniques used, the evolution of
analysis tools and the extensive application and usage to include new activities and
solutions. This is the difficulty in defining the geographic information systems accurately
and stricter because it has a dynamic nature according to the evolution of technology and
software used and expansion of application domains and user base, But it retains the main
components of the system which is people, Data, hardware, software and applications or
procedures. Accordingly there us no absolutely agreed upon definition of a GIS (deMers
1997). The following two definitions that are comprehensive and accurate:
a GIS is a system of hardware, software, and procedures to facilitate the management,
manipulation, analysis, modeling, representation, and display of georeferenced data to
solve complex problems regarding planning and management of resources (NCGIA 1990).
25
ESRI define GIS as (( A geographic information system (GIS) is a computer-based tool for
mapping and analyzing things that exist and events that happen on earth. GIS technology
integrates common database operations such as query and statistical analysis with the
unique visualization and geographic analysis benefits offered by maps. This is a realistic
and unique definition because he mentioned (analysis of events that happen on earth ) and
not just analyze things. Therefore it was comprehensive and accurate because the forest
fires, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, epidemics, etc., are events that happen on earth
related to time and place together not a place only.
3.1.2. GIS Structure And Elements
As we mentioned in the GIS definition, although the definitions vary according to the source
and according to time, they retain the main components of the system which is people,
Data, hardware, software, applications or procedures (Figure 3.1). A GIS is comprised of
five key components:
Hardware
Includes physical components that support data input, storage, processing, output, and
presentation. such as computers, network elements, plotters, scanners, etc. It also includes
field survey and data collection equipment.
Software
Includes non-physical components of a data collection, processing, and analysis
environment, mostly comprising of programs such as operating systems, database
software, spatial data software, and geo applications, etc.
Data
GIS deal with different types of data from spatial data and attribute data (descriptive data),
including geographical locations, aerial photo, satellite images, statistical data, etc., which
are collected and entered through the equipment. And analyzed, displayed and integrated
into the decision-making system through software.
26
People
Represents the GIS system operators, analysts, managers, and GIS users; who are in
charge of identifying GIS uses, data needs, analysis needs and feeding data into the
system
Processes
GIS Processes Includes the steps and procedures used to manage the system, data entry,
analysis, display maps, produce reports and all other related activities.
3.1.3. GIS Application in Local Government.
Integrated GIS give the local governments a solid foundation on municipal asset
management and daily operations management. they can build their own maps which
improve performance in many areas such as:
o Land-use planning
o Permit tracking
o Parcel/tax mapping
o public safety
o Road and utility maintenance
o Traffic route planning
o Event (crime, fires, flood, accidents)
o Reporting
o Emergency management
o Cartography
Figure 3.1: Components of geographic information system (GIS). (Source: by ESRI )
o Infrastructure (assessment and maintenance)
o Demographic data management
o Geological mapping and landslide hazards
o Engineering design
o Public works
o Environment
o Elections
o Green asset management
o Climate change scenarios
o Strategic planning, future development
27
3.1.4. The Motivation For GIS Assessment
Assessing the current status of GIS is the first step required in developing improvement
plans and any action outside this framework will be a loss of the accumulated investment of
previous projects in GIS. Without properly understanding current GIS usage practices,
improvement is difficult as the „as is‟ state is not known. Thus, aiming for a specific GIS
value without satisfying certain levels of organizational usage of GIS seems unfeasible (
Alrwais et al. 2015). GIS assessment processes provide definitions and characteristics of
the various stages traveled on the way to organizations GIS operation. It assists in
benchmarking of the current status of GIS in the organization and provides a road map to
the next level. Maintaining the previous investment in spatial information, developing a
future investment plan to move to an advanced stage, maximizing the benefits of GIS,
achieving sustainability and keeping the pace of advances in spatial data technologies are
the main drivers of the GIS assessment process.
3.2. The Northern Borders Municipality As A Case Study.
The northern borders area is located in the far north of Saudi Arabia, with a length of more
than 950 km along the Iraqi and Jordanian borders. Its administrative center is the city of
Arar - the headquarters of the Emirate of the region - located in the area of the region 1100
km from the capital Riyadh, On the Iraqi border. The discovery of phosphate ore and the
development of the King Abdullah Project for the development of the city of Waad al-
Shamal in Turaif Governorate for the mining industries have made the region a distinct
investment climate that sets it on the threshold of a major renaissance. the Northern
Borders Region includes 10 municipalities, Arar city is The administrative capital and the
headquarters of the emirate, The Northern Borders Municipality Serve the city of Arar and
have some powers and influence over other municipalities. The total area of Arar city is
about 16947sq km, which represents 15.3% of the total area of the Northern Borders
Region and provides the services to approximately 191,000 residents (Northern Borders
Municipality).
28
Map 3.2: Satellite View of Northern Borders Municipality
Map 3.1: Location of Northern Borders Municipality in Saudi Arabia
29
The municipality was established in 1971 and its most activities and responsibilities are:
o Planning and organizing the city, including prioritizing urban development, determining
growth trends, controlling land use, and taking advantage of all possibilities and
resources for the development of the region.
o Preparation of studies and implementation of infrastructure projects and other
recreational projects and services aimed at facilitating the life of citizens.
o Concern about the environment in general and the health of citizens in particular,
including the cleaning operations, markets control, regulate the movement of transport,
the implementation of gardens and the landscaping of streets and public squares.
The municipality has about 327 employees working in 45 major departments and sections
of the most important departments:
- Agency of Reconstruction and Projects
- Department of Urban Planning
- Department of Municipal Investment Development
- Department of Information Technology (IT)
- Department of Land and Property
- Department of municipal permits
- Agency of Services
- Department of Human Resource
- Department of Financial Affairs
These main departments include several sub-sections such as survey, agriculture,
environment, GIS unit, etc. According to the organizational structure of the municipality, the
GIS unit belongs to the IT department, Figure 3.2 shows the organizational structure of the
Municipal IT department (Northern Borders Municipality).
30
IT Department was established in 2005, its main responsibilities were to provide technical
support for IT infrastructure (hardware, networks, and software), development of municipal
operations according to the latest technologies and software, as well as training of
employees in the use of modern software.
The GIS unit in the municipality's IT department was established automatically (without
organizational structure or strategic plan) with the beginning of the first project in GIS in
2006, A project of establishing a GIS center in the municipality. The aim was to digitize
maps and establishment of e-Atlas of Arar city. Then two other projects for operation,
maintenance and updating spatial data and supplying equipment and software.
Figure 3.2: The organizational structure of the Municipal IT department.
31
3.3. GIS Assessment in The Northern Borders Municipality (NBM).
3.3.1 GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM).
A capability maturity model assesses an organization's ability to accomplish defined tasks.
The CMM concept originated with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI), which published
Managing the Software Process in 1989 to assess software contractors' ability to
successfully complete large software development projects. The CMM concept has since
been applied to system engineering, project management, risk management, and
information technology services. A CMM assesses an organization's maturity level based
on how it executes individual processes (Babinski 2011).
The GIS Capability Maturity Model is a key component of the URISA's GIS Management
Institute (GMI). Its primary purpose is to provide a theoretical model of a capable and
mature enterprise GIS operation within a designated organization (URISA).
This model is designed by URISA's GMI to provide a framework for addressing important
questions about GIS practices in organizations. What are the characteristics of a capable
enterprise GIS? What are the characteristics of a well-managed enterprise GIS?
3.3.1.1. Benefits of GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM)
It is likely that the return on investment (ROI) will increase as the level of maturity of GIS in
the enterprise increases, a GIS CMM can provide an indication of the ability of local
agencies to realize the potential benefits from their GIS investments (URISA), Figure 3.3
shows the local government GIS Capability Maturity Model. A GIS CMM allows local GIS
operations to gauge their capability and maturity levels against a variety of measures,
including:
- A theoretical end state of GIS data, hardware, and software infrastructure
- A theoretical end state of GIS organizational development
- The maturity level of other peer GIS organizations, either individually or collectively
- The maturity level of the subject organization over time
32
- The maturity level of the organization against an agreed target
According to Babinski (2011), Once the CMM Assessment has been completed, the
Municipality will have several benefits:
Help program managers develop and communicate program accomplishments to upper
management.
Determine where improvements and investments are needed.
Provide input to program planning.
Support future budget requests with regard to the investments of GIS in the municipality.
Reorganization of operations and services as needed.
Improve communication and collaboration within your GIS team and other departments
(Babinski 2011).
Figure 3.3: The Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model (Babinski 2011).
33
3.3.1.2. GISCMM Components And Assessment Categories
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) assumes that mature agencies have more
well developed enabling technology and resources and that their processes and practices
maximize the effectiveness of their GIS infrastructure. Enabling capability includes
technology components, data, professional GIS staff, an appropriate organizational
structure, and other resources and infrastructure. Execution ability is the ability of the staff
to maximize the use of the available capability, relative to a normative ideal.
As shown in Figure 3.4, The typical capability maturity model is based on an assessment of
the subject organization‟s maturity level based on the characteristics of the organization‟s
approach to individual defined processes. These processes are usually defined by five
levels are Ad hoc (chaotic) processes, Repeatable processes, Defined process, Managed
process, and Optimized processes, Table 3.1 shows the five maturity levels are reported
according to ( GMI ).
Level Categories Description
Level One Ad hoc (chaotic) process Typically in reaction to a need to get something
done.
Level Two Repeatable process Typically based on recalling and repeating how
the process was done the last time.
Level Three Defined process
The process is written down (documented) and
serves to guide consistent performance within the
organization.
Level Four Managed process
The documented process is measured when
performed and the measurements are compiled
for analysis. Changing system conditions are
managed by adapting the defined process to
meet the conditions.
Level Five Optimized process
The defined and managed process is improved
on an on-going basis by institutionalized process
improvement planning and implementation.
Optimization may be tied to quantified
performance goals.
Table 3.1: The Maturity levels in GIS Capability Maturity Model.
34
Because the GIS Maturity Assessment seems focused on the typical coordination function
of many state‟s GIS, it seems unsuitable for municipal, county, and other agency types of
GIS. So the GMI chose to adopt a modified form of GIS Maturity Assessment rating
system for the Enabling Capability portion of the GIS Capability Maturity Model using seven
categories, state GIS organizations assess their development in 56 specific detailed
characteristics based on their current implementation of each characteristic. Table 3.2
illustrates the categories used for the Enabling Capability portion of the GIS Capability
Maturity Model.
Score/ Pt Status
1.00 Fully implemented
0.80 In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability
0.60 In progress but with only partial resources
available to achieve the capability
0.40 Planned and with resources available to
achieve the capability
0.20 Planned but with no resources available to
achieve the capability
0.00 This desired but is not planned
Not Applicable* Not Applicable
* This is a non-numeric response that requires an explanation of why this component should not be considered in assessing the operation.
Table 3.2: Assessment categories according to the modified maturity model by GIM.
35
3.3.2. Performing of GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM).
3.3.2.1. Questionnaires And Interviews Analysis.
An interview was held with the group of IT manager, specialists and responsible for the
GIS unit in the municipality, It included three participants:
o IT Manager
o IT infrastructure manager
o GIS specialist
The main objective of the interview was to fill out the GIS Capability Maturity Model
questionnaire, and we addressed many detailed questions regarding the development of
municipal GIS and the current challenges. The questionnaire of the GIS maturity model
took about 90 minutes. I explained to the interview group the importance of the
questionnaire and its results. And this questionnaire is a self-evaluation needs objectivity
and accuracy in order to have facts that will be a basis on which to build an effective
improvement plan.
Figure 3.4: Characteristics of Maturity Model
36
In the beginning, I explained the importance of GIS practices assessment in the department
and the need to make them a regular annual procedure. The expected results of the GIS
assessment will be the basis for the GIS improvement plan. We discussed the important
role of spatial information and spatial services for improved the operations performance of
the municipality and enhance the quality of services provided by the municipality to citizens
and the private sector. The municipality needs comprehensive and reliable spatial data that
can be easily exchanged. The discussion then revolves around the need for data
standardization and the creation of a spatial data dictionary and that the Ministry of
Municipal and Rural Affairs (MOMRA) it should be our reference in this issue.
All departments and municipal branches must use unified spatial information through geo-
applications to prevent data conflicts. This issue needs further work in raising awareness
for employees and users who produce or manipulate spatial data.
We discussed the IT infrastructure and the manager of IT infrastructure informed me that
the infrastructure is generally good and ready to the interoperability of spatial data ( SDI ) at
the level of internal departments and branches, But at the governmental agencies level,
more servers and devices will be required. and I have observed as visually the components
of IT infrastructure such as devices, printers, intranets, and servers, Also I have verified the
spatial software used.
3.3.2.2. Performing of GISCMM.
In the GISCMM questionnaire, the questions are categorized by enabling capability and
execution ability. For each question, the respondent (GIS Officer) is asked to self-assess
their organization, provide comments, and describe documents and other evidence to
support the initial self-assessment (See GISCMM questionnaire in Appendix A ).
Each section of this model focuses on individual components of the GISCMM assessment.
Each section describes the focus of the individual assessment, presents a graphic
representation of NBM GIS assessment. The sections also include key analysis. These
sections include:
37
GIS Enabling Capability Assessment
The GISCMM describes Enabling Capability as the technology, data, resources, and
related infrastructure that can be bought, developed, or otherwise acquired to support
typical enterprise GIS operations. Enabling capability includes GIS management and
professional staff. This section of the survey includes 23 components. For each component
of the Enabling Capability Assessment portion of the model, the organization can assess
itself in one of the following categories:
GIS Data Resources Assessment
The first four components refer to GIS data and GIS data maintenance (EC1 - EC4). In this
section, the scores for EC1 through EC4 are derived from the average scores indicated for
each category for each type of data, Details of this section are displayed in the section (
GIS Data Resources Assessment ). and a related questionnaire has been prepared for
them ( See questionnaire extension for the framework and business data in Appendix B ).
EC1 and EC2 refer to FGDC-defined framework data available for NBM GIS unit. EC3 and
EC4 refer to priority non-framework "business data" needed to meet NBM GIS application
needs. Business data was identified after a visit to the municipality and an overview of the
ongoing operations of GIS. Framework data and business data was identified as follows:
EC1:Framework GIS Data
EC2: Framework GIS Data Maintenance
EC3: Business GIS Data
EC4: Business GIS Data Maintenance
EC5: GIS Data Coordination
EC6: Metadata
EC7: Spatial Data Warehouse
EC8: Architectural Design
EC9:Technical Infrastructure
EC10: Replacement Plan
EC11: GIS Software Maintenance
EC12: Data back-up and security
EC13: GIS Application Portfolio
EC14: GIS Application Portfolio Management
EC15: GIS Application Portfolio O&M
EC16: Professional GIS Management
EC17: Professional GIS Operations Staff
EC18: GIS Staff Training and Professional
Development
EC19: GIS Governance Structure
EC20: GIS is Linked to Agency Strategic Goals
EC21: GIS Budget
EC22: GIS Funding
EC23: GIS Financial Plan
38
GIS Execution Ability Assessment
This section analyzes the NBM GIS unit's self-evaluation against the Execution Ability
portion of the GIS Capability Maturity Model. This section of the model focuses on the
process maturity of the GIS operation. The GISCMM describes Execution Ability as " the
ability of the staff to maximize the use of the available capability, relative to a normative
ideal". This section of the survey includes 22 components. For each component of the
Execution Ability portion of the model, the organization can assess itself in one of the
following categories:
EC1. GIS Framework Data:
EC1a: Geodetic Control Data
EC1b: Cadastral Data
EC1c: Orthoimagery Data
EC1d: Elevation Data
EC1e: Hydrography Data
EC1f: Administrative Units Data
EC1g: Transportation Data
EC2. GIS Business Data:
EC3a: Address Data
EC3b: Census Data
EC3c: Land-use Data
EC3d: Municipal Property and Investment Data
EC3e: Sensitive-area Data (Red Zone)
EC3f: Utilities Data
EC3g: Urban Planning Data
EC3h: Land Cover Data
EC3i: Building Data
EC3j: Store Shop Data (Retail Outlet)
EA1: New Client Services Evaluation and Development
EA2: User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training
EA3: Service Delivery Tracking and Oversight
EA4: Service Quality Assurance
EA5: Application Development or Procurement Methodology
EA6: Project Management Methodology
EA7: Quality Assurance and Quality Control
EA8: GIS System Management
EA9: Process Event Management
EA10: Contract and Supplier Management
EA11: Regional Collaboration
39
3.4. Findings
In this part of the research, the findings are displayed in several sections. Each section
focuses on individual components of the GISCMM assessment. Includes individual rating
descriptions and presents a graphic representation of municipality Rating. These sections
include:
GIS Enabling Capability Assessment
GIS Data Resources Assessment
GIS Execution Ability Assessment
Summary of Assessment
3.4.1. GIS Enabling Capability Assessment:
This section of the survey includes 23 components, Table 3.3 shows below the NBM
ratings for Individual GIS enabling capability components assessment. In general, The
average of the NBM ratings for the components of enabling capability assessment is an
explicit moderate status where the average rating of 23 EC components is about 0.52 But
the average is not always a title to the truth. The detailed rates of EC components indicate
some strengths and reveal deficiencies. Figure 3.5 shows the findings summary of the
NBM GIS unit Enabling Capability assessment.
EA12: Staff Development
EA13: Operation Performance Management
EA14: Individual GIS Staff Performance Management
EA15: Client Satisfaction Monitoring and Assurance
EA16: Resource Allocation Management
EA17: GIS data sharing
EA18: GIS Software License Sharing
EA19: GIS data inter-operability
EA20: Legal and policy affairs management
EA21: Balancing minimal privacy with maximum data usage
EA22: Service to the community and to the profession
40
No. Enabling Capability Component Municipality
Rating
EC1 Framework GIS Data * 0.86
EC2 Framework GIS Data Maintenance * 0.63
EC3 Business GIS Data * 0.82
EC4 Business GIS Data Maintenance * 0.58
EC5 GIS Data Coordination 0.40
EC6 Metadata 0.60
EC7 Spatial Data Warehouse 0.60
EC8 Architectural Design 0.80
EC9 Technical Infrastructure 1.00
EC10 Replacement Plan 0.20
EC11 GIS Software Maintenance 0.80
EC12 Data back-up and security 0.80
EC13 GIS Application Portfolio 0.60
EC14 GIS Application Portfolio Management 0.20
EC15 GIS Application Portfolio O&M 0.20
EC16 Professional GIS Management 0.60
EC17 Professional GIS Operations Staff 0.20
EC18 GIS Staff Training and Professional Development 0.20
EC19 GIS Governance Structure 0.40
EC20 GIS is Linked to Agency Strategic Goals 0.40
EC21 GIS Budget 0.60
EC22 GIS Funding 0.40
EC23 GIS Financial Plan 0.40
The highest individual NBM rating is for EC9: Technical Infrastructure, with a rating of 1.00
(Fully implemented). Where there technical infrastructure in place to maintain and operate
the GIS and to meet the municipality business needs. Technical infrastructure includes
hardware (servers, storage, desktops, input and output peripherals), network components,
operating system, and GIS software. This component is interrelated with EC8 architectural
Low Moderate High
GIS Enabling Capability Assessment * The scores are derived from the average scores indicated for each category for each type of data.
Table 3.3: Individual enabling capability component assessment.
41
design which recorded a rating of 0.80 (In progress with full resources available to achieve
the capability ). However, I was unable to access the architectural design documents
because of the constraints of centralization by MOMRA.
The findings also indicate strengths of NBM GIS that including the NBM ratings for EC1:
Framework GIS Data with a rating of 0.80 (In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ) and EC4: Business GIS Data with a rating of 0.78 which will discuss
their individual components in the next section.
It is also a strength of the NBM ratings for EC11: GIS Software Maintenance with a rating of
0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability ). The Municipality
uses ESRI software for desktop and server ( Arc GIS 10.3/Full extensions ) and has been
used three versions in 12 years. As for open-source‟ GIS software the Municipality uses the
Google Earth to fill the gap of old versions of satellite images.
The Municipality believes that the GIS software is suitable for current business needs and
that it wishes to update the GIS software for the latest version, so the self-assessment is
advanced but not fully implemented. The NBM ratings for EC12: Data back-up and security
with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability ).
The Municipality has a data back-up system on a separate Machine, which is periodically
(weekly/monthly) replicated at different levels of transactions, data, and tables, but the
Municipality wants to separate the spatial data on an independent server with the resources
are available to implement it, So the self-assessment is advanced but not fully
implemented.
The NBM ratings for the components of enabling capability assessment revealed very
serious deficiencies, The NBM ratings for EC14: GIS Application Portfolio Management and
EC15: GIS Application Portfolio O&M with a rating of 0.20 ( Planned but with no resources
available to achieve the capability ). Although there are three geo- applications in the
municipal applications portfolio, there is still no common design and development
framework in place. Also, the maintenance and modernization to ensure sustainability are
42
facing the problem of financial resources. The municipality's GIS officer pointed out that
applications are already disabled due to lack of technical support and maintenance.
The NBM ratings for EC10: Replacement Plan with a rating of 0.20 ( Planned but with no
resources available to achieve the capability ). The municipality has no replacement plan
due to lack of financial resources, Therefore, the assessment was low.
The NBM rating for EC17: Professional GIS Operations Staff and EC18: GIS Staff Training
and Professional Development with a rating of 0.20 ( Planned but with no resources
available to achieve the capability ). For purposes of the GISCMM, adequate operational
staffing is defined as meeting the „roles‟ defined by the Geospatial Technology Competency
Model. The Municipality is facing a major obstacle in providing professional GIS operations
staff to meet the business. The Municipal GIS unit currently employs two specialists in an
unstable through an external contractor, which is insufficient to meet business needs. Also,
The instability case threatens the implementation of improvement plans on the long or
medium term. The municipality's GIS officer pointed out that the low rating of this
component may be a major reason for the low ratings of GIS practices in the municipality in
general. At the GIS staff training and professional development, the rating was low because
of its relationship with the EC17 component and the lack of financial resources.
Weaknesses also included the component EC22: GIS Funding and EC23: GIS Financial
Plan with a rating of 0.20 (Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability).
During the interview, IT and GIS officials reported that the low assessment of financial
resources and the budget it seems exceptional, The situation has been better in previous
years and is expected to recover in the future.
The ratings were moderate for some assessment components such as EC6: Metadata,
EC7: Spatial Data Warehouse, EC13: GIS Application Portfolio, EC16: Professional GIS
Management with a rating of 0.60 ( In progress but with only partial resources available to
achieve the capability ). The GIS specialist said that the ratings of these components is not
43
high but also not frustrating because a little of stability in the budget and funding will
increase these ratings quickly.
It should be noted here that the metadata will be assessed in detail in the data gap analysis
section in chapter 5.
GIS Data Resources Assessment
This section shows the NBM GIS self-evaluation against the four data-related components
of the Enabling Capability portion of the GIS Capability Maturity Model that refers to GIS
data and GIS data maintenance (EC1 through EC4) as shown in Table 3.4 , 3.5 The results
refer to The NBM rating for EC1: Framework GIS Data with a total average rating of 0.86
(In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability) and EC2: Framework
GIS Capability Maturity Model Enabling Capability Assessment Northern Borders Municipality Date: February 2019
Figure 3.5: Summary of The Enabling Capability Component
Assessment of The NBM GIS Unit
GIS Enabling Capability Assessment
44
GIS Data Maintenance with a total average rating of 0.63 ( In progress but with only partial
resources available to achieve the capability ). The results show a gap between the ratings
of availability of framework data required for business needs and the data maintenance and
updating, owing to inadequate specialists and lack of financial resources in the last two
years according to officials. For business data the results refer to The NBM rating for
EC3:Business GIS Data with a total average rating of 0.82 (In progress with full resources
available to achieve the capability) and EC4: Business GIS Data Maintenance with a total
average rating of 0.58 ( In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the
capability ). The gap between the ratings of business data and business data maintenance
seems wider.
No. Framework GIS Data / Data Maintenance
[ EC1, EC2 ]
Municipality
Rating
EC1a Geodetic Control Data 1.00
EC2a Geodetic Control Data Maintenance 0.60
EC1b Cadastral Data 0.80
EC2b Cadastral Data Maintenance 0.60
EC1c Orthoimagery Data 0.80
EC2c Orthoimagery Data Maintenance 0.20
EC1d Elevation Data 0.80
EC2d Elevation Data Maintenance 0.80
EC1e Hydrography Data 0.80
EC2e Hydrography Data Maintenance 0.80
EC1f Administrative Units Data 1.00
EC2f Administrative Units Data Maintenance 0.80
EC1g Transportation Data 0.80
EC2g Transportation Data Maintenance 0.60
Table 3.4: Individual framework GIS data and data maintenance. EC ratings.
45
For individual assessment of components EC1, EC2 (Framework GIS Data and Data
Maintenance ) we can report the following results:
EC1a: Geodetic Control data with a rating of 1.00 ( Fully implemented ). Where the
geodetic points cover the entire city and are sufficient for the present time to meet the
surveying works and existing infrastructure projects. The number of geodetic points
implemented by the municipality is 220 points. Geodetic data includes geographical
location (X,Y Coordinates) and coordinate reference, as well as a description card for each
geodetic point that includes all spatial and non-spatial data.
However, in terms of data maintenance and updating, the rating rate was reduced, EC2a:
Geodetic Control Data Maintenance with a rating of 0.60 ( In progress but with only partial
resources available to achieve the capability ). The low rating of EC2a was due to the lack
of projects for the implementation of geodetic points in the last three years.
EC1b: Cadastral Data with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ). The rating was not fully implemented due to data accuracy issues,
The GIS unit is working to improve data accuracy based on available human and financial
resources. The Cadastral Data Maintenance (EC2b) assessment came at a lower rate with
a rating of 0.60 ( In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the
capability ).
EC1c: Orthoimagery Data with a rating of 0.80 (In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ). The GeoEye Image satellite with resolution (0.50 m) covers the
whole city. The version 2012 is available in the municipality. The NBM plans to obtain
updated satellite imagery but there are currently no dedicated resources so the rating of
Orthoimagery Data Maintenance ( EC2c ) is low with a rating of 0.20 (Planned but with no
resources available to achieve the capability).
EC1d: Elevation Data with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ). It is linked to the Orthoimagery Data component (EC1c ). The
rating of Elevation Data Maintenance (EC2d) with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full
resources available to achieve the capability ) is higher than of the Orthoimagery Data
46
Maintenance (EC2c) because elevation data updating and maintenance are being carried
out through the project of preparation of the strategic plan for hydrological studies which
currently under execution by an external contractor.
EC1e: Hydrography Data with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ). EC2e: Hydrography Data Maintenance with a rating of 0.80 ( In
progress with full resources available to achieve the capability ). It's a good rating for
hydrography data maintenance because of The project of preparation of the strategic plan
for hydrological studies which is currently under execution in the municipality by an external
contractor where the project outputs represent comprehensive maintenance and updating
of data.
EC1f: Administrative Units Data with a rating of 1.00 ( Fully implemented ). The
Municipality has completed data at the level of administrative units (City, Districts,
Approved Plans Boundaries). The NBM has given priority to updating and maintaining
administrative units data, so the rate has been good where the Administrative Units Data
Maintenance (EC2f ) with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ).
EC1g: Transportation Data with a rating of 0.80 (In progress with full resources available to
achieve the capability ). The municipality is trying to complete the transportation data but
finds it difficult to obtain the data from the Ministry of Transport. Also, Due to a lack of
resources, the rate of maintenance and updating of data is low where the Transportation
Data Maintenance (EC2g) with a rating of 0.60 ( In progress but with only partial resources
available to achieve the capability ). Figure 3.6 shows the findings summary of individual
Framework GIS Data and Data Maintenance assessment of The NBM GIS unit.
47
No. Business GIS Data / Data Maintenance
[ EC3,EC4 ]
Municipality
Rating
EC3a Address Data 0.80
EC4a Address Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3b Census Data 0.40
EC4b Census Data Maintenance 0.40
EC3c Land-use Data 1.00
EC4c Land-use Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3d Municipal Property and Investment Data 0.80
EC4d Municipal Property and Investment Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3e Sensitive-area Data (Red Zone) 1.00
EC4e Sensitive-area Data Maintenance 0.60
GIS Capability Maturity Model Enabling Capability Assessment Framework GIS Data Assessment Northern Borders Municipality Date: February 2019.
Framework GIS Data / Data Maintenance Assessment
Figure 3.6: Summary of The Framework GIS Data Assessment
of The NBM GIS Unit.
.
Table 3.5: Individual Business GIS data and data maintenance. EC ratings.
48
EC3f Utilities Data 0.80
EC4f Utilities Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3g Urban Planning Data 1.00
EC4g Urban Planning Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3h Land Cover Data 0.80
EC4h Land Cover Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3i Building Data 0.80
EC4i Building Data Maintenance 0.60
EC3j Store Shop Data (Retail Outlet) 0.80
EC4j Store Shop Data Maintenance 0.60
For individual assessment of components EC3, EC4 ( Business GIS Data and Data
Maintenance ) we can report the following results:
The municipality has achieved a complete implementation with a rating of 1.00 ( 1.00 Fully
implemented ) in the components of the EC3c: Land-use Data, C3e: Sensitive-area Data
(Red Zone) and EC3g: Urban Planning Data. However, The data maintenance and
updating rates for these components are at a low level with a rating of 0.60 ( In progress
but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability ) due to lack of resources
and job instability of the GIS staff.
The municipality has achieved a good implementation with a rating of 0.80 ( In progress
with full resources available to achieve the capability ) in the components of the EC3a:
Address Data, EC3d: Municipal Property and Investment Data, EC3f: Utilities Data, EC3h:
Land Cover Data, EC3i: Building Data and EC3j: Store Shop Data (Retail Outlet). The
municipality has benefited from the progress of the address data as it has distributed maps
in the public squares and vital places by the guidance maps project called "You are here
now." which providing the geographical locations and access data for all nearby services
such as police stations, hospitals, schools, banks, hotels, car service, and ATM.
The GIS unit in the municipality was also able to develop an internal geo-application for the
management of municipal property and investment sites based on municipal property and
49
investment data. However, the NBM continues to suffer from the maintenance and updating
of data that recorded low ratings for these components due to lack of human and financial
resources with a rating of 0.60 ( In progress but with only partial resources available to
achieve the capability ).
The results show clear weaknesses in the components EC3b: Census Data and EC4b:
Census Data Maintenance with a rating of 0.40 ( Planned and with resources available to
achieve the capability ). GIS officials pointed out that the reason for this low rate of census
data is the difficulty of obtaining the census data from the Authority for Statistics, and that
there is no protocol for data exchange. This problem also appears in most non-spatial data.
Figure 3.7 shows the findings summary of individual Business GIS Data and Data
Maintenance assessment of The NBM GIS unit.
Business GIS Data / Data Maintenance Assessment
Figure 3.7: Summary of The Business GIS Data Assessment
of The NBM GIS Unit.
GIS Capability Maturity Model Enabling Capability Assessment Business GIS Data Assessment Northern Borders Municipality Date: February 2019.
50
3.4.2. GIS Execution Ability Assessment
As shown in Table 3.6 the findings of the assessment of Execution Ability Assessment
components to be low with rated at Level One: Ad-hoc processes and Level Two:
Repeatable processes, which represent 74% of the total EA assessment components
compared to a few categories classified at a high level, which represent 26% of the total EA
assessment components. There are many deficiencies and The strengths of this section of
the assessment are diminished. Figure 3.8 shows the results summary of the NBM GIS unit
Execution Ability self-assessment.
No. Execution Ability Components Municipality
Rating
EA1 New Client Services Evaluation and Development 2.00
EA2 User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training 2.00
EA3 Service Delivery Tracking and Oversight 2.00
EA4 Service Quality Assurance 2.00
EA5 Application Development or Procurement Methodology 3.00
EA6 Project Management Methodology 4.00
EA7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 3.00
EA8 GIS System Management 2.00
EA9 Process Event Management 2.00
EA10 Contract and Supplier Management 5.00
EA11 Regional Collaboration 2.00
EA12 Staff Development 1.00
EA13 Operation Performance Management 2.00
EA14 Individual GIS Staff Performance Management 2.00
EA15 Client Satisfaction Monitoring and Assurance 1.00
EA16 Resource Allocation Management 2.00
EA17 GIS data sharing 2.00
EA18 GIS Software License Sharing 2.00
EA19 GIS data inter-operability 3.00
EA20 Legal and policy affairs management 3.00
Table 3.6: Individual execution ability components assessment.
51
EA21 Balancing minimal privacy with maximum data usage 2.00
EA22 Service to the community and to the profession 1.00
Each of these three categories EA12: Staff Development, EA15: Client Satisfaction
Monitoring and Assurance and EA22: Service to the community and to the profession
(14% of the total EA assessment components) was rated at Level One: Ad-hoc
processes.
Each of these thirteen categories EA1: New Client Services Evaluation and
Development, EA2: User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training, EA3: Service
Delivery Tracking and Oversight, EA4: Service Quality Assurance, EA8: GIS System
Management, EA9: Process Event Management, EA11: Regional Collaboration, EA13
Operation Performance Management, EA14 Individual GIS Staff Performance
Management, EA16: Resource Allocation Management, EA17: GIS data sharing, EA18:
GIS Software License Sharing and EA21: Balancing minimal privacy with maximum
data usage ( 60% of the total EA assessment components) was rated at Level Two:
Repeatable processes (Typically based on recalling and repeating how the process
was done the last time) meaning that they are not managed using written procedures.
This rate gives a general indicator of the Execution Ability portion assessment of the
GIS Capability Maturity Model at a low level, Which requires more work and adequate
resources to improve GIS practices and progress in these categories.
Each of these four categories EA5: Application Development or Procurement
Methodology, EA7: Quality Assurance and Quality Control, EA19: GIS data inter-
operability and EA20: Legal and policy affairs management (18% of the total EA
assessment components) was rated at Level Three: Defined processes (The process is
written down (documented) and serves to guide consistent performance within the
organization) meaning that they are managed using written procedures.
52
EA6: Project Management Methodology was rated at Level Four: Managed and
measured processes (The documented process is measured when performed and the
measurements are compiled for analysis).
EA10: Contract and Supplier Management was rated at Level Five: Optimized
processes (The defined and managed process), The reason why this component is
rated at a high rate appears to be compliance with the related laws and legislation.
GIS Execution Ability Assessment
Figure 3.8: Summary of The Execution Ability Component
Assessment of The NBM GIS Unit.
GIS Capability Maturity Model Execution Ability Assessment Northern Borders Municipality Date: February 2019
53
3.4.3. Summary of NBM GIS Unit Assessment
Generally, The results show a moderate status with average 0.52 for the components of
GIS enabling capability assessment where the ratings of status category 0.20 ( Planned
but with no resources available ) represented 22% of the total components of enabling
capability assessment, The status category 0.40 ( Planned and with resources available )
represented 22% of the total components of enabling capability assessment, The status
category 0.60 (In progress but with only partial resources available ) represented 30% of
the total components of enabling capability assessment, The status category 0.80 ( In
progress with full resources available ) represented 22% of the total components of
enabling capability assessment and The status category 1.00 ( Fully implemented )
represented 22% of the total components of enabling capability assessment, While no
component was evaluated in the status category 0.00 (This desired, but is not planned )or
status (Not Applicable). Figure 3.9 shows a general indicator for ratings of GIS enabling
capability assessment in the NBM GIS unit according to the status categories.
Figure 3.9: Summary of The Enabling Capability Components Assessment of The NBM GIS Unit.
54
In terms of GIS Data Resources Assessment in NBM GIS Unit, the results were good with
high ratings where the EC1: Framework GIS Data with a total average rating of 0.86 (In
progress with full resources available to achieve the capability) and EC2: Framework GIS
Data Maintenance with a total average rating of 0.63 ( In progress but with only partial
resources available to achieve the capability ). There is a gap between GIS data and GIS
data maintenance, However, The GIS Data Resources in NBM GIS Unit are the most
important strengths observed in the findings of GISCMM. Figure 3.10 shows the summary
of GIS Data Resources Assessment in NBM GIS Unit.
For the assessment of the components of Execution Ability, the ratings were generally low,
which the most important weaknesses revealed by findings of GISCMM in NBM GIS Unit.
Where components were rated at a low level ( Level One: Ad-hoc processes and Level
Two: Repeatable processes) included 16 components which represent about 74% of the
total EA assessment components compared to the Level Three ( Defined processes )
which represent about 18% then Level Four ( Managed and measured processes) and
Level Five (Optimized processes) represent 4% of the total EA assessment components
Figure 3.10: Summary of GIS Data Resources Assessment in NBM GIS Unit.
55
each. Figure 3.11 shows a general indicator for ratings of GIS execution ability assessment
in the NBM GIS unit according to the level categories.
Figure 3.11: Summary of The Execution Ability Components Assessment of The NBM GIS Unit.
56
Chapter- 4: Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI )
4.1. Introduction
As mentioned previously, the transition to SDI needs to assess the current state of the GIS
practices environment as a first step. It also the implementation of SID requires the as a
parallel step a comprehensive and deep understanding of the key concepts, key
components roles, levels of SDI development and interrelationships in SDI levels
interaction. In this section, we will discuss the concepts, components and organizational
structure of SDI in accordance with literature review and previous studies.
4.2. Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Concepts
4.2.1. SDI Definition
Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) is an idea of making spatial data be shared and accessed
using the advanced GIS technologies, SDI refers to the integration of a number of
components to create an environment which enables a wide variety of users to access
precise, standardize and complete spatial information. The definition of SDI differs from
institution to institution and vary according to researchers and authors, Also because of its
dynamic nature the SDI definition differs over time according to the evolution of technology
and software used and expansion of application domains and user base.
According to FGDC (1996), The SDI as an umbrella of policies, standards, and procedures
under which organizations and technologies interact to foster more efficient use,
management, and production of geospatial data (FGDC.GOV).
Nebert (2004) defines SDIs as concepts that help to denote the relevant base collection of
technologies, policies and institutional arrangements that facilitate the availability of and
access to spatial data. The SDI provides a basis for spatial data discovery, evaluation, and
57
application for users and providers within all levels of government, the commercial sector,
the non-profit sector, academia and citizens in general ( Nebert 2004).
According to Rajabifard (2007), “SDI as a dynamic, hierarchic and multi-disciplinary
concept that encompasses policies, organizational remits, data, technologies, standards,
delivery mechanisms, and human resource dimensions” (Rajabifard 2007).
4.2.2. Components of SDI
According to Groot and McLaughin 2000 SDI consists of the following four components:
Geographic data (fundamental geospatial datasets), technology (for storing, access,
distribution and use of geo-information), Standards (for describing, exchanging and linking
geo-information) and policy and organization. The components of SDI are highly interacted
in providing spatial information for the users. The accessibility, retrieval, and delivery of any
spatial information are directly based on collaboration between all components of SDI
(Groot and McLaughin 2000).
According to Rajabfard and Williamson (2001), the core components of SDI are policy,
access networks, technical standards, people and spatial data. People are stakeholders,
data/service providers, users, etc. and their relationships. Data is the spatial or non-spatial
which is generated, exchanged or consumed in the context of SDI. Access network
referrers to communication links that connect stakeholders and data with each other and
allows for communication and utilization of data/services by people or other services. SDI
Policies are generally tools to monitor and control the relationships among stakeholders
and the way they utilize data/services in the context of SDI. In order to facilitate the
communication and exchange of spatial and non-spatial data in the context of SDI,
numbers of protocols and standards are developed and being utilized. The development of
these standards is, however, a dynamic process and they may change based on the
dynamic needs of people, country context, and structure of information systems (Rajabifard
2001).
58
4.2.3. SDI Hierarchy
Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI) have different levels, These levels interact with each
other through vertical and horizontal relationships. SDI takes a hierarchical structure, as the
higher the level of SDI the fewer data details is reported. See Figure 4.1.
According to Rajabifard (2000) SDI hierarchy is of great importance where the SDI at the
national level accommodates a central connection between the lower and higher levels to
guarantee a continuous agreement on standards, policies, and sharing of data (Rajabifard
et al. 2000). The hierarchical structure also refers to the importance of local /state SDI as a
broad base on which to build the higher levels, where more details of data as well as issues
of data maintenance and updating.
Figure 4.2: SDI Hierarchy ( Adapted from Rajabifard and Williamson, 2001)
Figure 4.1: Nature and relations between SDI components
(adapted from Rajabifard and Williamson, 2001)
59
4.3. The Motivations of SDI Development in Local Government
SDIs have become very important in determining the way in which spatial data are used
throughout an organization, a nation, different regions and the world (Rajabifard 2007).
SDIs is a comprehensive and ideal tool in facilitating how spatial data and spatial
information systems are used and maximizing return on investment via the best way to use
of spatial data available to governments, which have consumed successive budgets in their
establishment and maintenance over decades. They allow the sharing of data, which
enables users to save resources, time and effort when trying to acquire new datasets.
Local government is responsible for the implementation of SDI where it plays a key role in
the implementation of SDI from bottom to top because the local government is a rich
source of accurate and detailed spatial information which is utilized not only at the local
level but increasingly at other levels of government to build the spatial data infrastructure
(SDI) at a state and national level (McDougall et al. 2005). In this sense, high-level SDI
initiatives should be aware of and monitor how Local Authorities deal with GI&GIS to avoid
having Local SDIs in place that is not tuned (Salvemini 2004).
According to Smit (2009), the worldwide national governments are implementing SDI
development policies in different stages. The underlying justifications for the creation of
these SDI policies are;
Reduction of duplication in spatial data creation and maintenance
More efficient use of spatial data by third-party users in disparate locations
Creating homogeneity in spatial data through prescribing standards
Ease of access to spatial data to improve decision making with regards to specific
location related phenomenon (Smit et al. 2009).
60
4.4. Local / Municipal SDI Model
Several patterns and models have emerged for the development of SDI, including
hierarchical and process-dependent ones as follows:
Top-down and Bottom-up Model
The top-down model is supported by legislation, regulation and Funding and executive
procedures. A successful example of this model the USA‟s National Spatial Data
Infrastructure (NSDI) and The European Union spatial data infrastructure (INSPIRE).
Although these models have survived, they have not been successful in other less
developed countries, The top-down approach is increasingly becoming unpopular due to
high failure rates manifesting contemporary SDIs (Tumba and Ahmad 2014).
The SDIs from existing initiatives at lower levels ( local/state SDI ) has become more
desirable in our time, where local levels are the natural evolution of GIs' practices in the
organization, and we can say that the success of local SDI will necessarily lead to the
success of higher levels and the opposite may not true. The user-driven bottom-up
approach led to greater horizontal and vertical integration of spatial data resources on the
local and regional scales (Smit et al. 2009).
Product and Process-Based Models
According to Rajabifard (2001) Based on the strategies, aims, objectives, and status of
individual SDI initiatives in different levels, two models namely product-based and process-
based can be identified in contemporary SDI development, as shown in Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.3A The product-based model represents, the main aim of an SDI initiative being
to link existing and upcoming databases of the respective political/administrative levels of
the community. The process-based model. Figure 4.3B, This model presents the main aim
of an SDI initiative as defining a framework to facilitate the management of information
assets. In other words, the objectives behind the design of an SDI, by any coordinating
agency, are to provide better communication channels for the community for sharing and
using data assets (Rajabifard and Williamson 2001).
61
The SDI hierarchy creates an environment, in which decision-makers working at any level
can draw on data from other levels, depending on the themes, scales, currency, and
coverage of the data needed (Rajabifard and Williamson 2001). As Figure 4.4 shown below
The Local SDI level is an operational pattern within the process-based model.
Data People
Social
Figure 4.3: Product and Process-Based Models for SDI development (Rajabifard and Williamson 2001)
A: Product Based Model
B: Process Based Model
Definition Collection Integration Data base Creation Dissemination
62
Municipalities are one of the members of the local SDI and have an impact on higher levels
with regard to the access network, Policy, and Standards. The effect here is a reciprocal
relationship between SDI levels as Rajabifard (2001) pointed out in Table 4.1.
Figure 4.4: Organizational structure for SDI Hierarchy (Rajabifard, 2001)
Table 4.1: Relations between different level of SDIs (Rajabifard 2001)
63
Chapter-5: The Opportunities of Transition to Local SDI
5.1. Overview
This chapter provides the performing of Data Catalogue GAP Analysis in Northern Borders
Municipality against the list of fundamental datasets identified and presents the findings of
the data analysis. The chapter also contains performing of GIS SWOT Analysis in The
Northern Borders Municipality depending on the analysis of the interviews and
questionnaires results, GIS SWOT Analysis evaluates the strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats in regards to advancing a GIS's practices of the Municipality. The
findings are then discussed and recommendations are made for future research and
practices.
5.2. Data Catalogue GAP Analysis in The Northern Borders Municipality
5.2.1. Introduction
Gap Analysis is a strategic planning tool to help you understand where you are, where you
want to be and how you‟re going to get there. Through the GISCMM assessment the GIS
Data Resources have been assessed, included the GIS framework data and business
data, the situation was not bad as average rates were recorded 0.86 (In progress with full
resources available to achieve the capability) for GIS framework data and 0.82 (In
progress with full resources available to achieve the capability) for GIS business data. In
this section, we will conduct another assessment using the gap analysis tool of municipality
spatial data catalogue compared to the fundamental datasets to be identified to identify
missing data and metadata. This step will help to develop a plan to complete and improve
the spatial data required for SDI implementation.
5.2.2. Fundamental Data
The Fundamental Data is a geospatial data of high interest or significant comply with
standards and required by many parties to support the design and development of a
country or organization.
64
The Permanent Committee on the Spatial Data Infrastructure for the Americas (CP IDEA)
defined the fundamental data are the sets of uninterrupted and completely integrated
spatial data that provide a context and reference information in a Spatial Data Infrastructure
(SDI). Classifying any kind of data as a framework or fundamental data is normally subject
to its availability in the major sectors where the SDI undergoes development, and to the
consensus that exists between the main parties interested (Permanent Committee on the
Spatial Data Infrastructure for the Americas, CP IDEA,2013).
For this section of the study The Fundamental Data will be used according to the list of
fundamental datasets provided by Rautenbach (2015) in his study to identifies the
fundamental spatial datasets in a local government and explorers the guidelines of
international Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) initiatives in order to help in the planning of
future strategies. Rautenbach has defined the list of data based on two lists as an initial
guideline for the choice of fundamental datasets (Rautenbach 2015). The guidelines are:
o Fundamental datasets for the INSPIRE SDI as the best practices, See Table 5.1.
o Fundamental datasets According to the previous study by (Farah and Ottichilo 2006),
See Table 5.2.
BASIC DATA INSPIRE Annex I data
COMMONLY USED THEMATIC DATA INSPIRE Annex II data
Administrative units Statistical units
Transport networks Buildings
Hydrography including water catchment
areas Soil
Elevation including terrestrial elevation,
bathymetry, and coastline Geology
Cadastral parcels Land use
Land cover Human health and safety
Protected sites Government service and environmental
monitoring facilities
Ortho-imagery Production and industrial facilities
Table 5.1: Cornerstones datasets in the INSPIRE directive
65
Coordinate reference systems Agricultural and aquaculture facilities
Geographical grid systems Population distribution - demography
Geographical names Area management/ restriction/ regulation
zones & reporting units
Addresses including postal regions Natural risk zones
Atmospheric conditions
Meteorological spatial features
Sea regions
Bio-geographical regions
Habitats and biotopes
Species distribution
Level of importance Fundamental geospatial datasets
High
Administrative boundary
Populated places/settlements
Topography
Hydrography
Addresses
Infrastructure
Transportation
Medium
Populated places/settlements
Utility Networks
Vegetation
Geodetic controls
Low
Cadastral
Land use
Population data
Agriculture/Forestry
Poverty, Health, Security
On this basis, the list of fundamental datasets was determined according to previous
studies and INSPIRE directive by Rautenbach (2015) with slight modification according to
Table 5.2: Summarized List of Fundamental datasets According to the previous study by
(Farah & Ottichilo, 2006) via (Rautenbach 2015).
66
the local nature of case study, Where coastal dataset and some classes such as fisheries
and forestry were not added. Table 5.3 shows the Fundamental datasets used in spatial
data catalogue gap analysis.
Fundamental Datasets
Administrative boundaries Imagery
Addresses Informal Trading Areas
Artificial Surfaces Infrastructure
Building Inland Water
Cadastre Land Cover
Climate Land Tenure
Conservation Land Use
Demography Relief
Drainage lines River
Fire Boundaries Roads
Fire Stations Soil type
Flood points Vegetation
Geodetic reference Voting Districts
Geographical Place Names Waste Removal Areas
Geology
5.2.3. Performing Data Catalogue GAP Analysis
The gap analysis will be conducted by comparing the spatial data catalogue of Northern
Borders Municipality ( See the NBM Data Catalogue in Appendix C ) against the list of
fundamental datasets identified in Table 5.3. The gap analysis will conduct an investigation
into the NBM data catalogue, including metadata and attribute data, to identify the gaps or
missing data at the data catalogue (Data Schema), metadata and attribute data level. Table
5.4 shows a summary of the GAP Analysis.
Table 5.3: The List of Fundamental datasets (by Rautenbach 2015)
67
Fundamental
Dataset Features
In the NBM
Catalogue?
Y/N
Data /Attribute
data available?
Y/N
Metadata
available?
Y/N
Administrative
boundaries
All boundaries Y Y Y
Addresses Street Addresses Y Y N
Artificial Surfaces Applicable Artificial Surfaces N N N
Building Border Customs (Border
Post) N N N
Educational Institutes Y Y Y
Health Institutes Y Y Y
Hotel Y Y Y
House Y N N
Large Building (Factory,
Warehouse, etc.) Y Y N
Market Y Y Y
Islamic Education Foundation Y Y N
Municipal Council Y Y Y
Place of Worship Y N N
Police Station Y Y Y
Post Office (Postal Office) Y Y Y
Post Office Area N N N
Power Station Y Y Y
Prison (Correctional Facility) Y Y N
Ruin (Historical Building) N N N
Shopping Centre Y Y Y
Store Ship Area Y Y Y
Store Shop (Retail Outlet) Y Y N
Cadastre Cadastre Y Y Y
Climate Rainfall Y N N
Temperature Y N N
Wind Y N N
Atmospheric Pressure Y N N
Coastal All Coastal Features Y N N
Conservation Conservation (Reserve Area) Y Y N
Biodiversity Regions N N N
Table 5.4: The summary of the GAP Analysis
68
Ecosystem N N N
Wildlife (Fauna) N N N
Demography Population Statistics Y N N
Drainage lines Aqueduct Y Y Y
Canal Y Y Y
Furrow N N N
Pipeline Y Y N
Siphon Y Y N
Fire Boundaries Fire Boundaries Area N N N
Fire Stations Fire Station Point Y Y Y
Flood points Flood points Y Y N
Geodetic reference Control Point Y Y Y
Geoids Y Y Y
Geographical
Place Names
Place Names Y Y Y
Geology Hydrogeology Y Y Y
Structural Geology Y N Y
Imagery Arial Photography N N N
Satellite Images Y Y Y
Topographic Map Raster N N N
Informal Trading
Areas
Informal Trading Area N N N
Infrastructure Railway Y Y N
Transportation Y Y Y
Utility networks Y Y N
Inland Water Dam Y Y Y
Dry Pan Y Y N
Fish Farm N N N
Lake N N N
Large Reservoir Y Y Y
Marsh Vlei Y Y N
Mud Flats N N N
Pool N N N
Purification Plant (Water
Treatment Plant) Y Y Y
69
Sewerage Works Y Y N
Swamp (Marsh) Y Y N
Water Tank Y Y Y
Ground Water Y N N
Land Cover Land Cover Y Y Y
Land Tenure Land Ownership N N N
Land Use Land Use Y Y Y
Relief Contour Y Y Y
Depression Contour N N N
Spot Height Y Y Y
Roads All Roads Y Y Y
Soil type Soils Y N N
Vegetation All Vegetation types N N N
Voting Districts Voting Points N N N
Voting Districts N N N
Waste Removal
Areas Waste Removal Route N N N
5.2.4. Findings
Table 5.4 above shows the findings of the gap analysis performance of the NBM data
catalogue against the list of fundamental datasets, The table includes findings of the
existing data, attribute data and available metadata. the following datasets and features are
missing in the NBM data catalogue:
1- Artificial Surfaces
2- Border Customs (Border Post)
3- Post Office Area
4- Ruin (Historical Building)
5- Biodiversity Regions
6- Ecosystem
7- Wildlife (Fauna)
8- Furrow
9- Fire Boundaries Area
10- Arial Photography
11- Topographic Map Raster
12- Informal Trading Area
13- Fish Farm
14- Lake
15- Mud Flats
16- Pool
17- Land Tenure
18- Depression Contour
19- Vegetation
20- Voting Districts
21- Voting Points
22- Waste Removal Areas
70
The gap analysis findings indicate that 22 features from 78 features ( total fundamental
datasets ) representing 28% of the total fundamental data are missing data. In addition,
there is a loss of attribute data as well as a lot of metadata missing, which are necessary
for the implementation of municipal SDI, Where the percentage of missing metadata is 60%
of the total fundamental datasets, which is a serious percentage that requires improvement.
Figure 5.1 shows a summary of the missing data.
Through the investigation of the NBM data catalogue and the findings of the gap analysis
performance indicated above we can report the following notes:
There is a clear problem with the lack of metadata for many data sets.
There are a number of duplicates of some of the datasets.
Non-spatial data (tabular and statistical) are not available although there are tables in
the NBM data catalogue but no data.
The features are available in the NBM data catalogue but in a different dataset not as
described in the fundamental datasets, Therefore, the data structure (Data Schema)
must be reconstructed to reorganize features as in fundamental datasets.
Figure 5.1: Summary of the missing data in the NBM data catalogue
71
In general, spatial data in the Northern Borders Municipality is not bad, but there is a gap
due to missing data as well as some problems such as data duplicate, lack of metadata,
statistical data and updating attribute data, These problems are caused by poor data
storage and maintenance. An SDI will solve this problem by creating a central storage unit
for the data and implementing spatial data standards and metadata to ensure that the
correct and relevant data can be found (Rautenbach 2015).
5.3. GIS SWOT Analysis in The Northern Borders Municipality
5.3.1. Introduction
A SWOT Analysis is a strategic planning method used to evaluate the strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats as they relate to a topic. Based on the results of the
GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM) in chapter three and the gap analysis of the data
catalogue in this chapter as well as the interviews and questionnaires conducted for this
purpose, we will perform the SWOT Analysis to identify strengths and weaknesses as well
as opportunities and threats in regards to advancing an enterprise-wide GIS and Transition
to SDI in the Northern Borders Municipality as a local government entity.
5.3.2. GISCMM Results Analysis
GIS SWOT Analysis is primarily based on an analysis of the findings obtained from the
GISCMM assessment, The findings included all individual components of the GISCMM
assessment in the municipality In two main categories: GIS Enabling Capability
Assessment and GIS Execution Ability Assessment.
The Figures 5.2, 5.3 summarizing the results of the assessment of the GISCMM, the rates
were categorized into three categories High, Moderate and Low to facilitate identification of
strengths and weaknesses in order to perform GIS SWOT Analysis.
72
Figure 5.2: Summary Ratings of GIS Enabling Capability Components For The NBM
Figure 5.3: Summary Ratings of GIS Execution Ability Components For The NBM
73
5.3.3. Questionnaires And Interviews Analysis.
As mentioned above in the second chapter, three questionnaires will be used in addition to
the main questionnaire of the maturity model (GISCMM). The three questionnaires aimed
to determine the type of spatial data already existing in the departments as well as the
spatial data they required from other parties. It also aimed to determine the readiness of
spatial data interoperability between The different departments and agencies. Interviews
and questionnaires revealed the strengths and weaknesses of GIS practices in municipal
departments and government agencies.
An interview was held with the three groups of departments and branches managers in the
municipality, Consultants and project managers related to GIS and responsible for spatial
data in some government agencies. Interviews were conducted in 16 visits ( 13 interviews
for municipal departments, 3 interviews for government agencies ) and the interview lasted
between 30-45 minutes (See schedule of interviews in Appendix D ).
Initially, I gave a definition of GIS and related concepts such as SDI, interoperability of
spatial data and geo-applications. We discussed the important role of spatial information
and spatial services for improving the operations performed and the quality of services
provided by the agency/department to citizens and the private sector, Then we discussed
the IT infrastructure status and the availability of IT infrastructure for interoperability of
spatial data through geo-applications. We also spoke extensively about the challenges
faced by GIS practices and the obstacles to interoperability between government agencies
and departments. The most important challenges identified were the lack of GIS specialists,
the lack of a fixed budget for the GIS sustainable operation, the low awareness of the
importance of GIS, different data formats and The lack of standardized data standards.
During the interviews, a questionnaire consisting of 27 questions was provided to measure
and evaluate aspects of GIS practices in terms of human resources, spatial data,
infrastructure, standards and policies, in addition to identifying the strengths and
weaknesses of the GIS in the municipal Departments and government agencies (See
municipal departments and government agencies questionnaires in Appendix E,F ).
74
It should be noted here that the questionnaire of municipal departments and branches did
not include the IT Department and the GIS Unit, which were evaluated in detail through the
maturity model (GISCMM) questionnaire as described in chapter three.
Below we present the results of questionnaires conducted at different levels and
respondents:
5.3.3.1. Municipal Departments/ Branches Questionnaire:
As mentioned above, 13 interviews were conducted at the level of departments and
branches managers in the municipality, Consultants and project managers related to GIS,
and the questionnaire for these groups was completed. We can report the findings as
follows:
The findings of the questionnaire indicate a low level of awareness of the importance of
GIS in the municipal department's staff (Question 2). Levels (poor - moderate) scored
77% of the total responses, while the level (high) scored 23% of the total responses (
Figure 5.4).
There is a state of satisfaction among the municipality's employees on the performance
of the IT infrastructure (Question 4), at the level of hardware, network, software, and the
Figure 5.4: The level of awareness of GIS
75
Internet, The satisfaction rate was 77%, 77%, 46%, 61.5%, respectively. In addition, 12
responses from 13 (total responses) are connected to municipal servers where scored
92% of the total responses ( Figure 5.5).
The GIS software is not widely used by the municipal departments (Question 7), where
(ArcGIS Desktop) scored 31% of the total responses, while Google Earth and CAD
scored 92% and ArcGIS Server is not used outside GIS unit.
For the spatial data used or those produced by municipal departments through daily
transactions (Question 12), the highest response was Statistical data and reports,
Locations and addresses, Land use data, Survey data which scored 85%, 54%, 46%,
46% respectively ( Figure 5.6).
The findings indicate a real problem with the metadata available in the municipal
departments (Question 14), where the responses to the availability of metadata (Yes)
scored 31%, (No) scored 69% of the total responses ( Figure 5.7).
Figure 5.5: Satisfaction with the state of IT infrastructure
76
For the spatial data and services which required from municipal GIS unit (Question 16),
According to the responses of municipal departments and branches, The highest
response was Locations and addresses, Infrastructure and utilities data and
Measurements with score 100%, Land use data, Administrative units, Online Geo-
Figure 5.6: Spatial data at departments
Figure 5.7: Available metadata
31%
69%
77
explorer, Statistical data and reports, Geo-Applications and Spatial analysis scored
92%, Then the Printed maps scored 85% of the total responses.
For the spatial data required from other government agencies (Question 17), The
highest response was Power grid data, Water network, Sewerage network, and
Telecommunication network with score 92%, Then the Population statistics data, and
Transport data scored 61.5%, While Meteorological data scored 54% of the total
responses ( Figure 5.8).
As for how to obtain spatial data (Question 18), the findings show that the municipal
departments are using the central server of spatial data in a limited domain where
scored 23%, The reason has been explained in the questionnaire that the central server
of spatial data not working permanently and stable. The highest response was Digital
(Storage device) and Hard copy (maps and reports) with score 100%, Then by E-mail
scored 38% of the total responses ( Figure 5.9).
Figure 5.8: Spatial data required from government agencies
78
(Question 19) The results indicated that the difficulties related with the spatial data
facing the municipal departments and branches are: No integrated Data, No metadata,
Data not updated and Difficulty in data access with scores 100%, 92%, 65%, 61.5%
respectively ( Figure 5.10).
Figure 5.9: How to get spatial data
Figure 5.10: The difficulties related to spatial data
79
The questionnaire group had a view on how the data homogeneity of the SDI
implementation (Question 25), The highest response was Develop an interoperable
framework, A unified communications environment, Use of standardized global
standards, Provide metadata and Standardization of database models with scores
100%, 100%, 85%, 77%, 69% respectively.
In general, there was a complete consensus on the municipal departments need for
spatial data infrastructure (Local SDI) with score 100% (Question 24), as well as more
meetings and workshops to discuss the standards and policies issues (Question 26), as
well as the municipal departments, need for geo-applications for operation,
maintenance and data management and sharing (Question 22).
Finally, the findings of the questionnaire indicate that there are some geo-applications
that have been developed (Question 21), but are not working in a stable manner
(Management of Municipal Investment App, Management of municipal projects App,
Geo- Explorer of Arar City ) (See figure 5.11), and there are some e-services that based
on spatial data (Question 23), But operates centrally through the ministry (MOMRA)
such as Balady System to issue building permits and professional licenses.
Figure 5.11: Geo-applications required
80
5.3.3.2. Government Agencies Questionnaire:
Three interviews were conducted in government agencies providing services to citizens:
o Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture.
o Saudi Electricity Company.
o Branch of the Ministry of Transport.
The questionnaire for this purpose was filled during interviews, And we can report the
findings as follows:
One government agency of the three agencies ( research sample) has a GIS unit with
two GIS specialists at Saudi Electricity Company (Question 1).
There is no fixed budget for operation and maintenance of GIS (Question 3).
For the metadata available in the government agencies (Question 13), where the
responses to the availability of metadata (Yes) scored 33%, (No) scored 67% of the
total responses ( Figure 5.12).
There are no standards for database models in the three government agencies
(Question 9).
There is satisfaction in the government agency ( research sample) on IT infrastructure
(Question 4), at the level of hardware, network, software, and the Internet, The
satisfaction rate was 67%, 67%, 100%, 67%, respectively ( Figure 5.13).
Figure 5.12: Availability of metadata
33%
67%
81
For the spatial data software (Question 7), ArcGIS Desktop, Portal for ArcGIS and
Microstation scored 33% of the total responses, while Google Earth and CAD scored
100% of the total responses ( Figure 5.14).
Figure 5.13: Satisfaction with the state of IT infrastructure
Figure 5.14: Using of the Spatial data software
82
For the spatial data which required from other government agencies (Question 16), The
highest response was Locations and addresses data, Land use data, Sewerage
network, Administrative units, and Telecommunication network with score 100% (
Figure 5.15).
The findings indicated to the difficulties related to the spatial data facing the
government agencies (Question 19), the responses for (No integrated Data, No
metadata, and Difficulty in data access ) scored 100%, and ( Data not updated, Lack of
statistical and non-spatial data) scored 67% of the total responses ( Figure 5.16).
About how the data homogeneity of the SDI implementation (Question 25), The highest
response was Develop an interoperable framework, A unified communications
environment, Use of standardized global standards and Standardization of database
models with scores 100%.
Figure 5.15: Spatial data required from other government agencies
83
There is a consensus on the need of government agencies to local SDI, and they also
agreed that the Northern Borders Municipality is the ideal choice to host SDI in terms of
spatial data quantity/qualitative and its appropriate technical and professional capacity.
Figure 5.16: The difficulties related to spatial data
84
5.3.3.3. SWOT Questionnaire
as mentioned before, the SWOT questionnaire targeted a wide range of GIS consultants,
project managers, staff and departments manager of the municipality. It was created the
questionnaire by the Google questionnaire forms service, SWOT questionnaire has been
published online and sent the link to the target groups via e-mail and social media. The
questionnaire was sent to 55 persons and the responses were 39 responses which
representing 71%. The questionnaire consists of 7 questions Which were designed with a
multiple choice system, was designed to measure the strengths and weaknesses of the
GIS in the Municipality, as well as the available opportunities to build on them to improve
GIS practices in the municipality, also the challenges and difficulties in using GIS in the
municipality which hinder the interoperability for spatial data. We can report the
questionnaire findings as follows:
Question 1: What are the benefits of using GIS in the municipality?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Saving time and efforts, Production of
maps and reports, Ease of access to information, Digitization and storing and The
ability to visualize) with scores 92.3%, 89.7, 84.6%,, 82.1%, 74.4% respectively ( Figure
5.17), These results reflect the uses of GIS in the municipality.
Figure 5.17: Responses of Question 1
85
Question 2: What defects do you see in GIS's practices in the municipality?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Lack of awareness of GIS, Lack of
GIS specialists, No integrated Data, Lack of users experience) with scores 79.5%,
69.2%, 48.7 respectively ( Figure 5.18).
Question 3: What opportunities can be built upon to improve the municipal GIS?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Availability of spatial data in a good
status, Availability of appropriate IT infrastructure, National orientation towards
governance and data sharing, Availability of software, GIS is a priority for upper
management ) with scores 79.5%, 71.8%, 66.7%, 64.1%, 53.8% respectively ( Figure
5.19). The results indicate the most important opportunities available to improve GIS
practices in the municipality. The results of this questionnaire are consistent with
previous findings to assess the maturity model (GISCMM) as well as a gap analysis.
Figure 5.18: Responses of Question 2
86
Question 4: What spatial data and services are you currently receiving from the GIS in
the municipality?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Printed maps, Locations, and
addresses, Land use data, Measurements, Investment data, and municipal property )
with scores 92.3%, 89.7%, 79.5%, 69.2%, 66.7% respectively, While the lowest
responses were in favor of choices ( GIS Training, Geo-Applications, Online Geo-
explorer, Spatial analysis, ) with scores 5.1%, 17.9%, 20.5%, 25.6% respectively (
Figure 5.20). The results indicate that GIS use of the municipality is not advanced and
that interoperability and data sharing services need to be improved, SDI will be an ideal
solution to improve the weakness revealed by this question.
Figure 5.19: Responses of Question 3
Figure 5.20: Responses of Question 4
87
Question 5: How do you get spatial data?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Hard copy (maps and reports, Digital
transfer (Storage device) ) with scores 74.4%, 66.7% respectively, While the lowest
responses were in favor of choices ( By E-mail, Central database (server) ) with scores
23.1%, 46.2% respectively ( Figure 5.21).
Question 6: In your opinion, what are the challenges that hinder the improvement of
GIS practices in the municipality?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Lack of specialized GIS staff, Lack of
an organizational structure for the GIS unit, Lack of an approved development plan,
there is no fixed budget for GIS, There is no exchange of data between internal
departments, Lack of awareness of the advantages of GIS, No standards of data ) with
scores 89.7%, 82.1%, 79.5%, 76.9%, 69.2%, 66.7%, 61.5% respectively ( Figure 5.22).
This section of the questionnaire clearly reveals the most important challenges facing
the improvement of GIS's municipal practices.
Figure 5.21: Responses of Question 5
88
Question 7: In your opinion, what are the solutions and suggestions for improving the
GIS practices in the municipality?
The highest responses were in favor of choices ( Provide adequate GIS staff, Develop
an organizational structure and define roles, Setting a defined development plan,
Provision of financial resources, Interoperability through applications, Raising
awareness of the advantages of GIS ) with scores 97.4%, 87.2%, 82.1%, 82.1%,
71.8%, 64.1% respectively ( Figure 5.23).
Figure 5.22: Responses of Question 6
Figure 5.23: Responses of Question 7
89
5.3.4. Performing of GIS SWOT Analysis
The performance of SWOT analysis has required the implementation of several procedures
to obtain the results and reliable information which will be relied upon (See GIS SWOT
Analysis questionnaires in Appendix G ). The current status of GIS practices has been
assessed in terms the Spatial data, IT infrastructure, GIS staff, Financial resources,
Policies and standards through several assessments and analysis tools which can be listed
in the following order:
GIS Capability Maturity Model Assessment (GISCMM)
Data catalogue GAP Analysis
Municipal Departments/ branches Questionnaire
Government Agencies Questionnaire
SWOT Questionnaire
STRENGTHS
The characteristics that place The Northern Borders Municipality at an advantage for
Improvement GIS practice and supports the transition to municipal SDI:
The Municipality has a good data catalogue that has been implemented in accordance
with the (Data Schema) circulated by Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (MOMRA),
where the missing features in the municipal data catalogue do not exceed 28% of the
ideal fundamental datasets catalogue according to the gap analysis conducted.
Figure 5.24: SWOT Analysis Framework
Based on the findings and facts obtained from the
implementation of these procedures we can
identify of the strengths in GIS practices, and
identify the opportunities and challenges of
Improve GIS and transition to municipal SDI, we
can perform the SWOT analysis as follows:
90
Availability of appropriate IT infrastructure which supports the interoperability of spatial
data.
A wealth of existing Spatial data on the level of framework GIS Data and business GIS
data.
Availability of ESRI Software (Desktop, Server ).
Accumulated experiences and projects output.
The municipality has a successful experiment with the guidance maps project in the
public squares and vital places. This project has contributed to highlighting the role and
importance of the municipal GIS unit and raising awareness of spatial information
among the public.
The municipality has developed an interactive web mapping application ( geo-explorer)
of the city, which is not working now but can easily be improved and re-published.
The municipality has developed two applications for internal operation (municipal
investment management - management and tracking of municipal projects), which can
be a strong start for the municipal SDI, but the running of applications needs to update
and maintenance procedures (See Arar city geo-explorer and municipal geo-applications
in Appendix H ).
WEAKNESSES
The challenges which may arise for the NBM when Improvement of GIS practice and
implementing a municipal SDI:
Lack of an organizational structure for the GIS unit.
GIS staff is inadequate.
Lack of a development strategic plan.
Financial resources are inadequate.
Lack of awareness of the advantages of GIS.
GIS operations lack defined processes and rely heavily on repeatable processes.
91
Lack of metadata.
There is no data integration.
Lack of data standards.
Data inaccuracies.
There is no exchange of data between internal departments.
Lack of training and knowledge transfer plan.
Data update and data maintenance are not sustainable.
OPPORTUNITIES
The items that will improve organizational effectiveness and efficiency of GIS practices,
We can identify the available opportunities based on the strengths of the existing
system, policies, needs, and national orientation:
Spatial data available
more uses of spatial data possible such as the development of applications.
IT Infrastructure (hardware and software) is ready to support interoperability.
Recognition of GIS advantages by department managers and users in terms of saving
time, Ease of access to information, improving the quality of decision making.
The national orientation towards governance and data sharing makes us in a great time
to advance GIS and implementation of the municipal SDI.
Develop a cost recovery plan in support of return on investment (ROI) and sustainability
of the system
Despite the modest assessment results, the Northern Borders Municipality is considered
the most powerful government agency in terms of GIS practices at the spatial data, IT
infrastructure, human and financial resources and previous experiences, an opportunity
for the initiative to lead and manage local SDI.
92
The priority of spatial information in upper management is increasing, So the
development of a strategic plan to improve and develop the spatial information system
will receive enthusiasm and support with adequate budgets.
THREATS
The issues that the NBM encounter that could threaten the Improvement of GIS practice
and implementing a municipal SDI:
Not implementing an organizational structure for the GIS unit.
Financial constraints.
Focusing too much on other initiatives and fields at the expense of GIS (priorities shift).
Spatial data conflicts may create chaos.
The complexity of connecting with government agencies.
Lack of integration between departments.
The complexities related to data harmonization.
Restrain department enthusiasm because of inadequate GIS staffing resources.
Reluctance to change because of failure in culture shift.
Legal and legislative constraints related to the cost recovery plan.
limitations on data sharing between government agencies.
5.4. Findings Discussion And Recommendations
5.4.1. Findings Discussion
Despite the modest evaluations of some GIS components, the municipality has strengths
that are the cornerstone of GIS development and improvement, in other words only a few
steps away from the improved situation. The municipality has assets that have been
invested in the past years such as spatial data, IT infrastructure and spatial data software,
93
which the constituent components or stages that receive the largest share of funding in the
implementation of GIS in enterprises.
According to the findings of the gap analysis performance of the NBM data catalogue
against the list of fundamental datasets, the municipality needs to restructure its data
schema to add missing datasets, address the large gap in metadata and complete attribute
data.
Many weaknesses and low ratings of GIS components evaluations such as GIS data
maintenance, Metadata, GIS Data Coordination, Professional GIS Operations Staff,
Process Event Management, GIS System Management, Operation Performance
Management and User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training were a direct result of
the lack of adequate GIS specialists to meet business needs, as well as job instability of the
teamwork who are working through an external contractor, which threatens the
sustainability of the GIS system and the procedures of improvement, That leading to loss of
the previous funding.
The questionnaires and interviews indicate that there is a big problem that the municipal
GIS is unplanned, where the GIS practices in the Northern Border Municipality lack a
strategic plan and a objectives business plan with a time plan. This problem is related to
the problem of the absence of a specific organizational structure for the GIS unit, The
municipality has also not developed a sustainable training plan to raise the professional
level of the GIS team, or the users training plan.
There is a lack of awareness of the advantages of the use of spatial information in
operation, maintenance and decision support, both at the municipal employees and citizens
levels. More effort is needed as part of a strategic plan to raise awareness and increase the
uses of GIS in order to advance GIS into the top priority of departmental managers and
upper management.
The instability of budgets for the operation and maintenance of geographic systems in
recent years has had a significant impact on the municipality's GIS practices, which has led
to the breakdown of geo-applications and web mapping application ( geo-explorer), despite
94
the good start of the municipality's GIS since 2006, but the situation has been temporarily
frozen during the last two years .
The Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs ( MOMRA) has developed several service
applications at the national level within the framework of e-government. Most services rely
on spatial data such as issuing building permits. The applications work a centralized
system on the Ministry's servers. Data quality, maintenance, and updating of the data are
the responsibility of the municipalities and this will be a justification for the development and
improvement of the GIS practice in the municipality.
The geographic information system is fully centralized in government agencies covered by
the questionnaire, where spatial data and applications are on a central server at the
headquarters of the ministry. Ministry agencies do not have GIS specialists except for the
Saudi Electricity Company, which has led to a lack of use of GIS in the ministry branches of
the Arar city.
The results show that government agencies, in general, are not ready to be integrated into
the local SDI with the municipality. The integration may be gradually agency-by-agency.
The Northern Borders Municipality is the most powerful government agency in the Northern
Borders Region in terms of GIS practices in spatial data, IT infrastructure, financial and
human resources, and previous experiences. Local SDI would be better to start with
municipal departments/branches, then other municipalities in the Northern Borders Region
(9 municipalities), then a partnership between the municipalities and the Saudi Electricity
Company, where they have an appropriate situation at the moment.
5.4.2. Recommendations
Based on the above assessment of the GIS current status, outputs analysis and discussion
of results we can make recommendations according to the following context:
As an initial step, we recommend the establishment a GIS steering committee
consisting of the manager of the GIS unit, the managers of the departments relevant of
95
the GIS or that provide services to people, financial Officer, representatives of the upper
management of the municipality and government agencies. It will be the responsibility
of the committee to develop an organizational structure of the GIS Unit and develop the
strategic plan for the GIS and administrative supervision on the implementation of its
objectives and has the responsibilities of prioritizing projects and directing investment in
spatial information.
Develop an organizational structure of the GIS Unit that includes a sufficient number of
specialists and coordinators, and carefully identify and distribute roles, as well as
identify and organize relationships with the municipal departments/branches and
government agencies. The organizational structure must be designed according to
written policies and standards, taking into account professional best practices. The
organizational structures establish a consistent and efficient way to direct resources,
convey information, comply with formal requirements, and ultimately accomplish the
organization‟s mission (Croswell 2018). According to Croswell, when designing the
organizational structure has to take into account the Current trends in GIS technology
and services that have had a major impact on GIS program organizational structure
such as cloud-based IT infrastructure, web-based mapping platforms, mobile apps and
the importance of 24/7 operations and services to users. We also recommend that the
department be independent and dependent directly on upper management.
The municipality needs to increase the GIS specialists enough to meet the needs of the
business and the implementation of the plan of GIS practice improvement and
municipal SDI. The focusing on GIS staff growth, that is, developing and retaining GIS
staff, is another key element in organizational strength and viability (ESRI 1997).
Through discussions in the interviews and observations we can say that the provision of
6 GIS specialists at least with varying expertise and multiple roles consisting of three (3)
specialists and technical support resources, two (2) GIS developers and one (1) GIS
coordinator, with a professional director will be the engine of development and
96
improvement of the GIS status in the municipality, The success stories are built on
champions. The objectives of the GIS strategic plan will be a key factor in determining
the number and roles of the GIS staff.
The assessment of the GIS Capability Maturity in the municipality with level 2
(Repeated Operations) indicates that the municipality urgently needs the defined
processes (level 3) by establishing procedures and workflows to ensure that systems
and data are well-managed, and efforts are efficient and coordinated. where the
process is written down (documented) and serves to guide consistent performance
within the organization, which will in turn address many weaknesses and low-rated
components such as GIS Data Coordination, Replacement Plan, Service Quality
Assurance, GIS System Management, GIS Governance Structure, and Operation
Performance Management.
We recommend that the Municipality take advantage of its most important opportunities:
The national orientation towards governance and data sharing that makes us in perfect
time to advance GIS and implementation of the municipal SDI. This is in addition to the
central applications and services that work on the ministry's servers (MOMRA), which
need to maintain and update the data a daily basis in the municipality, which is a great
opportunity for the municipality to take responsibility and improve the GIS practices.
The municipality should exploit the strengths of its geographic system for recovery and
improvement. We recommend re-operating the web mapping application ( geo-explorer)
and operational geo-applications (municipal investment management - management
and tracking of municipal projects) while providing a support and maintenance
environment, This will be the beginning of the municipality's transition to SDI and
interoperability, In addition to it would be a good publicity for the importance of spatial
information and the role of GIS unit in supporting operations, Which will have an impact
on the restoration of GIS to the top priority.
97
According to the findings of the gap analysis performance of the NBM data catalogue
against the list of fundamental datasets, The Municipality needs to improve its data
schema or restructure the municipal spatial data model to address missing datasets
and metadata, and need to complete missing attribute data. The data schema
restructuring must abide by FGDC standards and INSPIRE data specifications based
on ISO 19100 Geographic Information Standards ( See ISO 19100 Standards Series in
Appendix I ).
The establishment and development of a professional GIS unit at a high level of
efficiency and quality to provide spatial services require good and sustainable funding.
Therefore, the municipality must develop a self-financing or cost recovery plan that
requires new legislation and providing marketable spatial services such as GIS
Marketing, Retail, Network analysis, Hydrological analysis, Financial Services, Real
Time Services, Hard & Soft copy Maps and Spatial and statistical analysis. Taking into
account the balance between data sharing, which is the most important goal of SDI and
the cost-recovery plan for profit from spatial services, must be balanced. The return on
investment (ROI) of the use of spatial information as an added value to the national
economy should also not overlook.
According to the results of the research, the Northern Borders Municipality has a lot of
defects and weaknesses such as Lack of a development strategic plan, Lack of
awareness of the advantages of GIS, lack of defined processes, No data integration,
Lack of data standards and Lack of training and knowledge transfer plan. It also faces
many threats that may hinder the improvement of GIS practices and the dissipation of
the hopes of moving to SDI. To address all these obstacles, the municipality needs to
develop a geospatial Strategic Plan based on specific objectives with providing the
required budgets, The strategic plans start from a survey the current situation and
departmental meetings to identify needs, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and
98
threats. We recommend using the results of this research as a starting point for the
development of the geospatial strategic plan of the municipality. The municipality
should form a specialized committee to develop the strategic plan which focuses on the
collective needs and goals of departments and the city in a coordinated fashion to
maintain current investments while establishing a governance system and change
management process able to respond to shifting needs and priorities. We also
recommend that the municipality use experts, consultants and who have best practices
from outside the municipality to participate in the development of the geospatial
strategic plan, which will include spatial data, resourcing, governance, training and
education, infrastructure, software and public access, and include detailed plans for the
implementation of the objectives according to the following context:
GIS Strategic Plan :
( Vision, Goals, and Objectives ).
Programs:
(GIS Work Plan, GIS Annual Needs Assessment Update and Budget ).
GIS Implementation Plan:
- GIS Capability Maturity Model
- GIS Application Strategy
- GIS Technology Strategy
- GIS Integration Strategy
- GIS Data Acquisition Strategy
- GIS Training Plan
- GIS Data Standards
- GIS Levels of Service
99
Chapter-6: Conclusions
Municipalities are one of the local government entities and the largest producer and
provider of spatial data. It also the most in providing services to the people. GIS was
applied in the municipalities of Saudi Arabia in 2003, Saudi Arabia has invested in spatial
information in municipalities for 16 years. The time has come to evaluate GIS practices in
municipalities to determine the current situation and move to the advanced stages. It is time
to transform GIS from separated projects and isolated municipal data silos into a Spatial
Data Infrastructure (SDI ) that allows interoperability and exchange of spatial information
among all government agencies. Maintaining the previous investment in spatial information,
developing a future investment plan to move to an advanced stage, maximizing the benefits
of GIS, achieving sustainability and keeping the pace of advances in spatial information
technologies are the main drivers of the GIS assessment process.
This research targeted primarily the assessment of GIS practices in the municipalities as a
first step to move to spatial data infrastructure (SDI ) in local government (The Northern
Borders Municipality as a case study). Assessing the current status and determining the
maturity level of GIS practices in local government is an essential step to develop a
roadmap to design and implement the of SDI in local government as well as to reap other
gains from the assessment findings such as the ability to develop a strategic plan to
improve GIS based on the current status to reduce the waste of funds, And help decision-
makers to prioritize and promote needed GIS projects. Once strengths and weaknesses
are identified, Then directing the projects towards needs.
In view of the research findings, we find that the Northern Borders Municipality at the level
of (Enabling Capability ) has technology components and spatial data but lack adequate
professional GIS staff and an appropriate organizational structure, Is what made the
municipality at the lowest level of (Execution Ability). This means that as a result of the
previous projects the municipality has a good IT infrastructure, software and a large wealth
of spatial data, but unfortunately does not make effective use of spatial information
because of lack of organizational usage of GIS, The results of the research concluded that
100
the municipality needs comprehensive organizational handling, including the development
of an organizational structure, geospatial strategic plan, and provision of a fixed budget for
the implementation of the strategic plan, the promotion of sustainability and keeping of
previous investments.
The research also concluded that the municipality must be responsible for implementation
and hosting of local SDI, where the Northern Borders municipality is the most powerful
government agency in the Northern Borders Region in terms of GIS practices in spatial
data, IT infrastructure, financial and human resources, and previous experiences. In
contrast, Other government agencies suffer from weak GIS capabilities and are not
currently ready to participate in the local SDI and need to establish GIS centers.
In view of the findings and conclusions of this research, we propose recommendations for
future studies and practices as follows:
The GIS Capability Maturity Model ( GISCMM ) should be a component of GIS
practices in municipalities and government agencies.
The findings of this research and the recommendations of practice which presented in
chapter five should be taken into account in the development of the municipal
geospatial strategic plan.
We recommend that develop programs within the strategic plan to raise awareness of
the benefits of using spatial information
Improving this research more and applying it to other municipalities and government
agencies.
We recommend further researches to address more individually detailed topics:
- Role of geospatial strategic plans in achieving development.
- Operational framework of local SDI.
- Municipal SDI role in achieving municipal vision and goals.
- Metadata role in local SDI.
101
References
Al-Ramadan, B. (2013). Assessment of GIS Adoption in Saudi Arabia - Obstacles and
Challenges, March 31, 2013, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals Dhahran,
Saudi Arabia. <http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/crp/bramadan/crp514/presentations/3%20-
%20Assesment%20of%20GIS%20Adoption%20in%20Saudi%20Arabia%20-
%20%20March%2031,%202013.pdf>. Accessed 08 June 2018.
Alrwais, O., Horan, T., Hilton, B., Bechor, T. (2015). Evaluating Local Government Usage
of GIS: A New Maturity Model. Pre-ICIS Workshop on Locational Analytics and Big Data,
Fort Worth. 2015.
<https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d078/bd6bbbb2fd84cf5d7543345b87ae4862a9c1.pdf>.
Accessed 02 June 2018.
Babinski, G. (2011). „URISA Proposes a Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model‟
ArcNews, Winter 2010/2011.
<https://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/winter1011articles/urisa-proposes.html>. Accessed
21 June 2018.
Budić, Z., Budhathoki, N. R. (2006). Technological and Institutional Interdependences and SDI The Bermuda Square? International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research, 2006, Vol. 1, 36-50. <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1015.4068&rep=rep1&type=pdf>. Accessed 22 June 2018. Croswell, P. (2018). Organizational Models for GIS Management. The Geographic
Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge (1st Quarter 2018 Edition).
<https://gistbok.ucgis.org/bok-topics/organizational-models-gis-management>. Accessed
07 July 2018.
Darmawan, M., Sutanta, H., Rusmanto, A. (2014). Developing Local Government
Capacity for SDI Development in Indonesia. FIG Congress 2014, Engaging the Challenges
- Enhancing the Relevance, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 16 – 21 June 2014.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326293665_Developing_Local_Government_Ca
pacity_for_SDI_Development_in_Indonesia_7288_Developing_Local_Government_Capaci
ty_for_SDI_Development_in_Indonesia_Developing_Local_Government_Capacity_for_SDI
_Developmen/download>. Accessed 16 June 2018.
DeMers, M.N. (1997). Fundamentals of Geographic Information Systems. John Wiley and
Sons.
ESRI (no date). Environmental Systems Research Institute.<https://www.esri.com/en-
us/home>.
ESRI (1997). Organizational Structure for Local Government GIS: A Survey, An ESRI
White Paper. March 1997. <http://sigcursos.tripod.com/localgov.pdf> Accessed 07 July
2018.
FAO (2008), FAO Water Reports 34: Irrigation in the Middle East region in figures
AQUASTAT Survey – 2008. Edited by Karen Frenken.
<http://www.fao.org/tempref/agl/AGLW/docs/wr34_eng.pdf>. Accessed 10 June 2018.
102
Farah, H., Ottichilo, W. (2006). Fundamental Datasets for Africa.
FGDC.GOV (2000). Federal Geographic Data Committee. <http://www.fgdc.gov/> (3
August 2000).
Foresman, T.W. (1998). The history of geographic information systems: perspectives from
the pioneers, Prentice Hall.
Genovese, E., Roche, S., Caron, C. (2009). The value chain approach to evaluate the
economic impact of GIS: Towards a new visual tool. In: B. Van Loenen, J.W.J. Besemer,
and J.A. Zevenbergen, (Eds). SDI Convergence, Research, Emerging Trends, and Critical
Assessment. Netherlands Geodetic Commission 48.
GMI ( no date ). URISA's GIS Management Institute®.< https://www.urisa.org/gmi>.
Groot, R., McLaughin, J. ( 2000 ). Geospatial Data Infrastructure. Concept, cases and
good practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hart, G., Dolbear, C. (2007). What‟s so special about spatial? In Arno Scharl and Klaus
Tochtermann, editors, The Geospatial Web, chapter 4, pages 39–44. Springer, 2007.
Hickel, C., Blankenbach, J. (2012). From Local SDI to E-Government, Case study in
municipalities in the south of Hesse. FIG Working Week 2012, Knowing to manage the
territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage Rome, Italy, 6-10 May
2012.<https://www.fig.net/resources/proceedings/fig_proceedings/fig2012/papers/ts01d/TS
01D_hickel_blankenbach_5553.pdf>. Accessed 16 June 2018.
Jacoby, S., Smith, J., Ting, L., Williamson, I. (2002).Developing a Common Spatial Data Infrastructure between state and Local Government – An Australian case study. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 305–322.
Jomar J. Lucena. (2018). Assessment of gis capabilities of lgus of the province of la union,
phlippines: basis for action plan, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 63, 103-108
DOI:10.3303/CET1863018.<https://www.aidic.it/cet/18/63/018.pdf>. Accessed 13 June
2018.
Kubara, F. S. A. (2002). Evaluation the use of GIS in Saudi Arabia. Department of Urban
and Regional Planning, Architecture and Planning Faculty, King Faisal University.
Dammam, Sept 2002. <https://www.kfu.edu.sa/ar/Deans/Research/Documents/1029.pdf>.
Accessed 17 June 2018.
Kurwakumire, E. (2014). Towards a Public Sector GIS Evaluation Methodology. South African Journal of Geomatics, Vol. 3, No. 1, January 2014. <https://www.ajol.info/index.php/sajg/article/view/106128/96113>. Accessed 12 June 2018.
Leong, C., Yamaguchi, S., Takada, J. (2008). Assessment on Local Condition of GIS use in Sustainable Development of World Heritage Site: Case of Luang Prabang, Lao PDR, 44th ISOCARP Congress 2008. <http://www.isocarp.net/Data/case_studies/1293.pdf>. Accessed 11 June 2018. Majeed, Z.A. (2018). SDI Approach in The Increased Use of GIS in Government.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322417959_SDI_APPROACH_IN_THE_INCRE
ASED_USE_OF_GIS_IN_GOVERNMENT/download>. Accessed 01 June 2018.
103
McDougall, K., Rajabifard, A., Williamson, I.P (2002). From Little Things, Big Things
Grow: Building the SDI from Local to Government up. Proceeding of the Joint AURISA and
Institution of Surveyors Conference, Adelaide, South Australia, 25–30 November 2002.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228607799_From_little_things_big_things_grow
_building_the_SDI_from_local_government_up/download>. Accessed 01 June 2018.
McDougall, K., Rajabifard, A., Williamson, L. (2005). TS50.4 Understanding the Motivations and Capacity for SDI Development from the Local Level. From Pharaohs to Geoinformatics, FIG Working Week 2005 and GSDI-8. Cairo, Egypt April 16-21, 2005. <http://www.csdila.unimelb.edu.au/publication/conferences/Understanding%20the%20Motivations%20and%20Capacity%20for%20SDI%20Development%20from%20the%20Local%20Level.pdf>. Accessed 10 June 2018.
McDougall, K. (2006). A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership Model
to Facilitate SDI Development. Ph.D. theses, University of Melbourne, Australia, 2006.
McDougall, K., Rajabifard, A., Williamson, L. (2009). Local Government and SDI –Understanding their Capacity toShare Data. SDI Convergence. Research, Emerging Trends, and Critical Assessment. B. van Loenen, J.W.J. Besemer, J.A. Zevenbergen (Editors). NederlandseCommissievoorGeodesie Netherlands Geodetic Commission 48, 2009. <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kevin_Mcdougall/publication/228586522_Local_government_and_SDI-understanding_their_capacity_to_share_data/links/02bfe5118485e04b62000000/Local-government-and-SDI-understanding-their-capacity-to-share-data.pdf?origin=publication_detail>. Accessed 17 June 2018.
MOMRA (no date). Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs.
<https://www.momra.gov.sa/MediaCenter/News/Newsdetails.aspx?ID=1646&type=News>
NCGIA (1990). National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis.
<http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/>.
Nebert, D.D. (2004). Spatial Data Infrastructure Cookbook version 2.0
<http://gsdiassociation.org/images/publications/cookbooks/SDI_Cookbook_GSDI_2004_ve
r2.pdf>. Accessed 03 June 2018.
Northern Borders Municipality (no date). <https://www.arar-mu.gov.sa/>.
NSDI ( no date). National Committee For Geographic Information System.
<http://www.nsdi.gov.sa/>.
O’Flaherty, B., Bartlett, D., Lyons, G., Keankeo, W., Endig, M., Schulz, J. (2005).
Towards a Stage Model for GIS and SDI Deployment in Local Government, Conference:
Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, PACIS 2005, Bangkok, Thailand, July 7-
10.2005.<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian_OFlaherty/publication/221229312_To
wards_a_Stage_Model_for_GIS_and_SDI_deployment_in_local_government/links/00b7d5
2b42f03ce836000000/Towards-a-Stage-Model-for-GIS-and-SDI-deployment-in-local-
government.pdf?origin=publication_detail>. Accessed 03 June 2018.
Olfat, H., Rajabifard, A., Qureshi, F. M., Daneshpour, S. A. (2009). Facilitating urban
management through local SDI case study: the Municipality of Tehran.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228971080_Facilitating_urban_management_thr
104
ough_local_SDI_case_study_the_Municipality_of_Tehran/download>.Accessed 27 June
2018.
Permanent Committee for the Spatial Data Infrastructure of the Americas, CP IDEA.
(2013). Obtained from the Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Manual for the Americas
<https://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/RCC/docs/rcca10/E_Conf_103_14_PCIDEA_SDI%20
Manual_ING_Final.pdf>, consulted on April 28, 2017.
Rajabifard, A, Williamson, I. P., Holland, P., and Johnstone, G. (2000) From Local to
Global SDI initiatives: a pyramid building blocks, Proceedings of the 4th GSDI Conference,
Cape Town, South Africa, <http://www.gsdi.gov. docs.html>
Rajabifard, A., Williamson, I. P. (2001). Spatial data infrastructures: concept, SDI
hierarchy and future directions, in Proceedings, of GEOMATICS'80 Conference, Tehran,
Iran. <https://minerva-
access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/33897/66253_00001151_01_4_01Raj_Iran
.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y>. Accessed 08 June 2018.
Rajabifard, A. (2007). SDI Design to Facilitate Spatially Enabled Societ.
<http://csdila.ie.unimelb.edu.au/publication/books/SEG/SDI%20Design%20to%20Facilitate
%20Spatially%20Enabled%20Society.pdf>. Accessed 06 June 2018.
Ramadhan, A., Sensuse, D. I., Arymurthy, A. M. (2011). Assessment of GIS
Implementation in Indonesian e-Government System. 2011 International Conference on
Electrical Engineering and Informatics 17-19 July 2011, Bandung, Indonesia.
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aniati_Arymurthy/publication/221013573_Assessme
nt_of_GIS_implementation_in_Indonesian_e-
Government_system/links/56e658fb08ae65dd4cc1216e/Assessment-of-GIS-
implementation-in-Indonesian-e-Government-system.pdf?origin=publication_detail>.
Accessed 08 June 2018.
Rautenbach, V. (2015). Fundamental Spatial Datasets for Municipalities. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266468082_Fundamental_Spatial_Datasets_for_Municipalities/download>. Accessed 06 July 2018.
Salvemini, M. (2004). From the GIS to the SDI: a design path. 7th AGILE Conference on GIScience. proceedings <https://agile-online.org/conference_paper/cds/agile_2004/papers/1-1-4_salvemini.pdf>.Accessed 02 June 2018.
Saputra, R. M. (2011). Local Spatial Data Infrastructure Model at Local Level To Support Local E-Government GIS: Case Study Of DEPOK City, INDONESIA. Proceeding, 34th Asian Conference on Remote Sensing 2013(Bali, Indonesia20-24 October 2013). <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280918272_LOCAL_SPATIAL_DATA_INFRASTRUCTURE_MODEL_AT_LOCAL_LEVEL_TO_SUPPORT_LOCAL_E-GOVERNMENT_GIS_CASE_STUDY_OF_DEPOK_CITY_INDONESIA/download>. Accessed 25 June 2018.
Smit, J., Makanga, P.,Lance, K., Vries, W. (2009). Exploring relationships between
municipal and provincial government SDI implementers in South Africa. In Proceedings of
the GSDI 11 World Conference, June 15–19, 2009, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 18 pp.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228976773_Exploring_relationships_between_
municipal_and_provincial_government_SDI_implementers_in_South_Africa/download>.
Accessed 26 July 2018.
105
Tumba, A. G., Ahmad, A. (2014). Advocating for Spatial Data Implementation at the
Lower Tiers of Governments in Developing Countries: The Case of Africa, Universal
Journal of Geoscience, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 152–159, 2014.
Tumba, A. G., Ahmad, A. (2014). Geographic Information System and Spatial Data
Infrastructure: A Developing Societies‟ Perception. Universal Journal of Geoscience 2(3):
85-92, 2014, DOI: 10.13189/ujg.2014.020301.
<http://www.hrpub.org/download/20140205/UJG1-13901468.pdf>. Accessed 28 June 2018.
URISA (2013). Urban and Regional Information Systems Association. GIS Capability
Maturity Model, Modified in September 2013.
URISA (no date). URISA's GIS Management Institute®. <https://www.urisa.org/main/gis-
management-institute/>.
Vanier, D.J. (2004). Geographic information systems (GIS) as an integrated decision
support tool for municipal infrastructure asset management. Une version de ce document
se trouvedans : CIB 2004 Triennial Congress, Toronto, Ontario, May 2-9, 2004, pp. 1-10.
<https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b762/b00f22fb69b86fb9ceb7c67d32d057f75346.pdf>.
Accessed 09 June 2018.
Vries, W. (2006). Why Local Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI‟s) are not Just Mirror
Reflections of National SDI Objectives – Case Study of Bekasi, Indonesia. The Electronic
Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, EJISDC (2006) 27, 4, 1-28.
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278003768_Why_Local_Spatial_Data_Infrastruc
tures_SDI's_are_not_Just_Mirror_Reflections_of_National_SDI_Objectives_-
_Case_Study_of_Bekasi_Indonesia>. Accessed 04 July 2018.
Williamson, I.P., Rajabifard, A., Feeney, M. (2003). „Developing Spatial Data
Infrastructures: From Concept to Reality. London: Taylor and Francis. pp17 – 40.
106
Appendix
A. Part of Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model Questionnaire
See the full document of the GISCMM questionnaire through the link:
https://www.4shared.com/rar/fP59A3blee/GISCMM_QUESTIONNAIRE.html
MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE
Organization: Department: Date & Time: Respondents\ Name Occupation E-mail
Introduction:
The purpose of the GIS maturity model is to provide a means for any organization GIS
operation to gauge its maturity against a variety of standards and/or measures. Once the
organization completes the questionnaire, we will have a benchmark resource for future self-
assessments. The organization must be objective as possible in their self-assessment. But in
any case, an accurate assessment will identify weaknesses and development priority areas.
The model includes two sections to measure the capacity and Ability of the organization, in
addition to the extension containing detailed questions about the framework and business GIS
data.
Enabling Capability Components:
For each question in the „Enabling Capability‟ section, read the brief description. Check the
implementation category that best describes your agency‟s current status. Feel free to include
any clarifying comments or questions.
EC1. Framework GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate framework GIS data to meet its business
needs? For the GISCMM, framework data is defined as NSDI framework layers.
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
107
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Describe Documentation:
EC2. Framework GIS Data Maintenance
Are data stewards defined for each framework GIS data layer and the data is maintained
(kept up to date) to meet business needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Describe Documentation:
EC3. Business GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate business data (non-framework GIS data) to
meet its business needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
108
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Describe Documentation:
B. Part of Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model Questionnaire Extension
See the full document of GISCMM questionnaire Extension through the link:
https://www.4shared.com/rar/fP59A3blee/GISCMM_QUESTIONNAIRE.html
QUESTIONNAIRE EXTENSION
Framework And Business GIS Data
EC1a. Framework GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate Geodetic Control data to meet its business
needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
109
Describe Documentation:
EC1b. Framework GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate Cadastral data to meet its business needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Describe Documentation:
EC1c. Framework GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate Orthoimagery data to meet its business needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
Describe Documentation:
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
110
EC1d. Framework GIS Data
Does the agency have access to adequate Elevation data to meet its business needs?
[ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
[ ] 0.80 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.60 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.40 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.20 Planned but with no resources available to achieve the capability
[ ] 0.00 This desired but is not planned
[ ] Not Applicable (explanation required)
Comments:
Does your agency use recognized professional standards for this component?
Does your agency use a formal internal standard for this component?
C. Data Catalogue of The Northern Borders Municipality
Feature Dataset Feature Class Abstract Purpose Update
Frequency
Administrative Boundaries
Amanat Area of Amanat in polygon feature class
To establish the Amanat and to be used for mapping
As needed
Amanat_Centroids
City_Boundaries Boundary of city in polygon feature class
To delineate the city region As needed
City_Centroids
District_Centroids
Districts Area of District in polygon feature
To establish the District and to be used for mapping
Unknown
Governorate Area of Governorate in polygon feature
To establish the Governorate and to be used for mapping.
Unknown
Governorate_centroid
International_Boundary International boundary of Saudi Arabia in polygon feature class
To demarcate the international boundary of Saudi Arabia
Unknown
International_boundry_lines
Municipalities Boundary of Municipality in polygon feature class
To establish Municipality region and to be used for mapping.
Unknown
Municipality_Centroids
Region_Centroids
Yes No
Yes No
111
Regions Area of Region in polygon feature
To delineate Region and to be used for mapping.
As needed
Sectors Area of Sectors in polygon feature class
To delineate different sectors in the region
As needed
Sectors_Centroids
Sub_Municipality_Centroids
SubDistricts Area feature class showing subdivision of district.
To establish Sub-Districts and to be used for mapping.
As needed
SubMunicipalities Area feature class showing subdivision of Municipalities.
To establish Sub-Municipalities and to be used for mapping.
As needed
Cadastral Dataset Block_Centroids
Blocks Area feature class depicting Block in polygon feature class
To be used for mapping application
As needed
Building_Centroids
Buildings Outline of all constructed buildings within the region
To be used for mapping applications and for graphics presentation.
Continually
EasementRights Feature class depicting Easement rights.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Parcel_Centroids
Parcel_lines
Parcels
A piece or unit of land, defined by a series of measured straight or curved lines.
To be used for mapping application
Continually
SubParcel_Centroids
SubParcels Area feature class showing subdivision of parcels .
To be used for mapping application
As needed
Climate Dataset Climate_regions Area feature class showing the climatic regions of Arar
To be used for mapping application and graphical representation
As needed
Meteorology_stations Features depicting Meteorology stations within the region
To be used for mapping application and graphical representation
As needed
Demography Dataset Cesus_blocks Outline of administrative blocks for census blocks.
To be used for mapping application and graphic representation.
As needed
Environmental Dataset
Air_quality_stations Feature depicting the Air Quality Station.
To be used for mapping application and graphic representation.
As needed
Environmental_zoning Mapped zones that separate one environmental division to another.
To be used for mapping application and graphic representation.
As needed
Flood_Areas Area feature class showing flood areas
To be used for mapping. As needed
Land_cover
The classification of land according to the vegetation or material that covers most of its surface.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Noise_pollution_points Points displaying the Noise pollution locations.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Protected_areas Feature class showing the protected areas of the region.
To be used for mapping application and graphic representation.
As needed
Solid_waste_dump Locations showing the Solid waste dump.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Geology Hydrography Aquifers Area showing the distribution of aquifers
To be used for mapping As needed
112
Catchment_areas
Area showing an extent of land where water from precipitation drains into a body of water
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Dams Feature class depicting the distribution of Dams
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Desalination_stations Point feature class showing the location of Desalination stations.
To be used for mapping As needed
Geology Area showing the Geology of the region.
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Geology_lines
Geology_point
Hydrogeology Feature depicting Hydrogeology of the region
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Seas Outline of the stretch of sea To be used for mapping. As needed
Shore_lines Lines representing fringe of land at the edge of Sea.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Soil The feature class showing the different kinds of soils in the region
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Springs Location showing the site where the aquifer surface meets the ground surface.
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Wadi Valley or dry Riverbed that contains water during heavy rain.
To be used for mapping and graphic representation.
As needed
Wadi_lines Lines showing Valley line or dry Riverbed line (Line of an intermittent stream)
To be used for mapping As needed
Water_courses Area of water course in Line Feature class
To be used for mapping Continually
Water_tanks Point feature class depicting the distribution of Water Tanks within the region
To be used for mapping Continually
Wells Point feature class depicting the distribution of well within the region
To be used for mapping Continually
History Dataset N/A
Imagery Dataset N/A
Land Use Dataset Approved_landuse_plans Feature class depicting different region where Landuse plans are approved
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Natural Resources Dataset
Arable Area feature class depicting regions which are suitable for growing crops
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Gas_fields Area showing the distribution of Gas field
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Gas_wells Point Feature class depicting the distribution of Gas wells
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Mineral_mines Location depicting Mineral Mines in the region
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Mineral_wealth Feature class showing the distribution of Mineral Wealth in the region
To be used for mapping. Continually
Oil_fields Area representing the distribution of Oil field
To be used for mapping Continually
Oil_wells Locations showing the distribution of Oil wells
To be used for mapping Continually
113
References Dataset Index_references Area of Index References in polygon Feature class.
To be used for mapping As needed
Push_pin Location of Push Pin in point Feature class.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Services Dataset Educational_Facilities Location showing the educational facilities in the region
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Health_centers Point Feature class depicting the distribution of health centers of the region.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Parks Point Feature class depicting the distribution of Parks in the region.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Public_services Location depicting the list of Public Amenities in the region.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Religious_facilities Location depicting the list of Religious Facilities in the region.
To be used for mapping. As needed
Touristic_sites Point location showing Touristic Sites
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Topography Dataset Contour_lines Line Feature class joining points(elevation) of equal height of the region
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Ground_controlpoints
Accurately surveyed coordinate locations for physical feature that can be identified on the ground.
To be used for mapping As needed
Spot_elevation_points List of elevation measurement taken at a single location.
To be used for mapping As needed
Transportation Dataset
AirPorts Feature class showing the location of AirPort
To be used for mapping As needed
Bridges This Feature class contains digitized bridges.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Curbs Lines representing curbs/raised pavement.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Intersections Feature class showing the location of Intersections
To be used for mapping
Railway_stations Location of Railway station in Point feature class.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Railways Digitized outline of Railway line.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Road_Furnitures Feature class showing the location of Road
To be used for mapping Continually
Road_Polygons Primary, Secondary and Tertiary roads of Arar in Polygon Feature class
For querying, address mapping, planning and development of road network.
Continually
Roads Primary, Secondary and Tertiary roads of Arar in Line Feature class
For querying, address mapping, planning and development of road network.
Continually
Roads_Edges Digitized outline of Roads Edges
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
SeaPorts Feature class showing the location of Sea Ports
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Tunnels This Feature class contains digitized Tunnels
To be used for mapping As needed
UnderPasses Digitized outline of Under Passes
To be used for mapping As needed
114
WalkingPasses Digitized outline of Walking Passes
To be used for mapping Continually
Urban Dataset Crowded_rural Feature class showing the location of Crowded rural
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Direction_of_Urban_Development
Digitized outline of Direction of Urban Development
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Growth_centers Feature class showing the location of Growth centers
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Historical_growth Feature class showing the region of Historical growth
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Industrial_centralization Feature class showing the location of Industrial centralization
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Metropolitan_areas Digitized region of Metropolitan area
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Structure_plan Digitized Structure plan in polygon Feature class
To be used for mapping Continually
StructurePlanLines
Trend_extrapolation Digitized outline of Trend extrapolation
To be used for mapping As needed
Urban_area_points Feature class showing the location of Urban area points
To be used for mapping As needed
Urban_centers Feature class showing the location of Urban centers
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Urban_constraints Digitized region of Urban constraints
To be used for mapping As needed
UrbanAreaBoundaries Boundary of Urban area in polygon feature class.
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Utility Dataset Electrical_facilities Feature class showing the location of Electrical facilities
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Electrical_lines Digitized outline of Electrical lines
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Storm_water_lines Digitized outline of Storm water lines
To be used for mapping Continually
Telecom_facilities Feature class showing the location of Telecom facilities
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
Telecom_lines Digitized outline of Telecom lines
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
As needed
Waste_water_facilities Feature class showing the location of Waste water facilities
To be used for mapping Continually
Waste_water_pipes Digitized outline of Waste water pipes
To be used for mapping Continually
Water_facilities Feature class showing the location of Water_facilities
To be used for mapping Continually
Water_pipes Digitized outline of Water pipes
To be used for mapping and graphical representation
Continually
115
D. Interviews Schedule
Name Organization/department Occupation Time & Date
Mr. Sultan El Hadi NBM / Urban Planning
Department
Head of Planning section 10:00 AM,31/1/2019
Mr.Taib Al Enzi NBM / Urban Planning
Department
Manager of Urban Planning
Department
10:45 AM,31/1/2019
Mr.Abdallah Smayan NBM / IT Department IT Manager 10:15 AM, 3/2/2019
Mr.Mohamed Ahamed NBM / IT Department GIS Specialist 10:15 AM, 3/2/2019
Mr. Abdalziz Al hazal NBM / IT Department IT infrastructure Manager 11:00 AM, 3/2/2019
Mr.Ahamed Saafaq NBM / Survey Department Deputy Director of Survey
Department
10:00 AM,4/2/2019
Mr.Sultan Kandill NBM/Agency of Reconstruction
and Projects
Manager of Reconstruction and
Projects Agency
10:45 AM,4/2/2019
Mr. Khaled Al Enzi
Branch of the Ministry of
Environment, Water, and
Agriculture
Manager of Projects Department 10:30 AM,5/2/2019
Mr.Abd Al Majeed Mbird Saudi Electricity Company/ GIS
Unit
GIS Specialist 03:00 PM,5/2/2019
Mr.Abd Al Rahman Al
Koumi
Saudi Electricity Company/ GIS
Unit
GIS Specialist 03:00 PM,5/2/2019
Mr.Fahad Al-Taweeli NBM/ Department of Municipal
Investment Development
Manager of Investment
Development
09:00 AM,6/2/2019
Mr.Nowaf Al Enzi NBM/ Projects Coordination
Department
Manager of Projects
Coordination Department
09:45 AM,6/2/2019
Mr. Muhand al-Dakhil NBM / Agency of Services Manager of Services Agency 10:30 AM,6/2/2019
Mr.Jasser Dahawi NBM / Land and Property
Department
Deputy Director of Land and
Property Department
10:00 AM,7/2/2019
Mr.Abdulrahman
Mohamed
NBM / Land and Property
Department
technical assistant 10:00 AM,7/2/2019
Mr. Ahmed Attia NBM/ Agency of Reconstruction
and Projects
Manager of Project studies and
consultant on municipal projects
10:45 AM,7/2/2019
Mr. Islam Ahmed NBM / Urban Planning
Department
Manager of Project of preparing
local and detailed plans
10:00 AM,10/2/2019
Mr. Mohamed Rateb
NBM / Projects and Studies
Department
Manager of preparing of the
strategic plans for hydrological
studies project
10:45 AM,10/2/2019
Mr. Farhan al-Ruwaili Municipality Branch - East Arar Head of Municipality Branch -
East Arar
10:00 AM,11/2/2019
Mr. Musaed Al Enzi Municipality Branch - West Arar Services Hall Supervisor 11:30 AM,11/2/2019
Mr. Abdul Aziz Eid Branch of the Ministry of
Transport
projects engineer 01:00 PM,11/2/2019
116
E. Government Agencies Questionnaire. (Translated into English)
Organization:
Date & Time: Department:
E-mail Occupation Respondents\ Name
Introduction
This questionnaire aims at assessing the use of geographic information systems (GIS) in
government agencies and determining the readiness of government agencies to sharing
and exchange spatial data through the spatial data infrastructure (SDI) in the local
government. The questionnaire consists of 27 questions to measure and evaluate aspects
of GIS practices in terms of human resources and spatial data, IT Infrastructure and
standards and policies.
1. Does the Agency have a GIS unit? How many GIS Staff?
Yes No
1 employee 2 employees 3 - 5 employees More than 5 employees
2. What are the difficulties and problems related to the GIS staff?
Lack of GIS specialists Lack of organizational structure and specific roles
Lack of adequate equipment Difficulty in data access Other………….
3. Is there a fixed budget for the operation of GIS?
Yes No
QUESTIONNAIRE
GIS Practices in The Government Agencies
117
4. Are you satisfied with the level of IT infrastructure and communication network at
your Department?
Devices Yes No
Networks Yes No
Software Yes No
Internet Yes No
5. What devices do you have?
PC Server Scanner GPS devices laptop
Printer Plotter Other .............
6. What operating systems are used?
Windows Linux Other ..............
7. What spatial data software do you use?
ArcGIS Server ArcGIS Desktop QGIS Portal for ArcGIS
GeoMedia Microstation AutoCAD Google Earth
O Other ..........................
8. What spatial database software do you use?
Oracle SQL Server File Geodatabase MS Access
Postgres MS Excel Other ...................
9. Is there a model design for the (Data Model)?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
10. Are there any standards for the (GIS Data Model)?
Spatial coding standards Coordinate system Land uses Label fields
Explanation / Documents:.......................................................................................................
118
11. Are there any information security standards?
Yes No
12. What spatial data do you already have or are produced by the agency through
day-to-day transactions?
Locations and addresses Statistical data and reports
Land use data Survey data
Elevation data Satellite images
Administrative units Hydrological data
Investment data and municipal property Ground control points
Infrastructure and utility data Other .................
13. Are there metadata available for the available spatial data?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
14. What is the reference for the coordinate system used for spatial data?
Ain el Abd WGS1984 Other ..................
15. What spatial data or services do you need?
Locations and addresses Hydrological data
Land use data Investment data and municipal property
Administrative units Infrastructure and utility data
Elevation data Statistical data and reports
Measurements Online Geo-explorer
Printed maps Geo-Applications
Survey data Spatial analysis
Satellite images Other..................
119
16. Do spatial data need from other government agencies? What is this data?
Yes No
Data Provider Data Format Coordinates Reference
Required Data
GIS CAD Printed Map Service Satellite Image Other:.............
Ain el Abd
WGS 1984
GIS CAD Printed Map Service Satellite Image Other:.............
Ain el Abd
WGS 1984
17. How do you get spatial data?
Central database (server) Hard copy (maps and reports)
Digital (Storage device) E-mail
Other......................
18. Are there spatial data exchange agreements with agencies and institutions?
Yes No
19. What are the current difficulties related to spatial data?
Data not updated Difficulty in data access
Lack of statistical and non-spatial data Data is not available as a digital format
No integrated Data Data conflicting
Spatial data is inaccurate No metadata
Privacy and security Other.................
120
20. Are there applications for GIS?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
21. Are there geo-applications available to the public or government agencies?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
22. Does department need Geo-applications? For what purpose?
Data Sharing Map Services 3D Analysis
Real-time data Data Management Spatial Analysis
Decision making Improve customer services Support operations
Field mobile operations e-Services Support planning
23.Are there e-services linked to GIS?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
24. In your opinion, do agency need local SDI?
Yes No
25. In your opinion, how is the integration of spatial data in a unified structure of
SDI?
Use of standardized global standards Develop a dictionary of spatial data used
Standardization of database models Provide metadata
Develop an interoperable framework Standard data formats
A unified communications environment Other......................
121
26. Do you support holding more meetings and workshops among managers of
government agencies to discuss SDI policy and standards issues?
Yes No
27. In your opinion, which government agency has more spatial data, qualifications
and capabilities to host SDI?
Northern Borders Municipality Ministry of Transport
Saudi Electricity Company Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture
Statistics Authority Other ...................
Thanks for your response..
122
F. Municipal Departments/ branches Questionnaire. (Translated into English)
Organization:
Date & Time: Department:
E-mail Occupation Respondents\ Name
Introduction
This questionnaire aims at assessing the use of geographic information systems (GIS) in
municipal departments and branches and determining the readiness of municipal
departments to sharing and exchange spatial data through the spatial data infrastructure
(SDI) in local government. The questionnaire consists of 26 questions to measure and
evaluate aspects of GIS practices in terms of human resources and spatial data, IT
Infrastructure and standards and policies.
1. Does department have GIS specialists?
Yes No
1 employee 2 employees 3 - 5 employees More than 5 employees
2. What is the level of awareness among the staff of the department in the use of
GIS?
Poor Moderate High
3. Is the department/branch connected to the IT infrastructure and municipal
communication network?
Yes No
4. Are you satisfied with the level of IT infrastructure and communication network at
your Department?
Devices Yes No
Networks Yes No
Software Yes No
Internet Yes No
QUESTIONNAIRE
GIS Practices in Municipal Departments and Branches
123
5. What devices do you have?
PC Server Scanner GPS devices laptop
Printer Plotter Other .............
6. What operating systems are used?
Windows Linux Other ..............
7. What spatial data software do you use?
ArcGIS Server ArcGIS Desktop QGIS Portal for ArcGIS
GeoMedia Microstation AutoCAD Google Earth
Other ..........................
8. What spatial database software do you use?
Oracle SQL Server File Geodatabase MS Access
Postgres MS Excel Other ...................
9. Is there a model design for the (Data Model)?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents: .......................................................................................................
10. Are there any standards for the (GIS Data Model)?
Spatial coding standards Coordinate system Land uses Label fields
Explanation / Documents: .....................................................................................................
11. Are there any information security standards?
Yes No
124
12. What spatial data do you already have or are produced by the department
through day-to-day transactions?
Locations and addresses Statistical data and reports
Land use data Survey data
Elevation data Satellite images
Administrative units Hydrological data
Investment data and municipal property Ground control points
Infrastructure and utility data Other .................
13. What spatial data formats are already in place?
GIS CAD Microstation MS Access
MS Excel Other…………
14. Are there metadata available for the available spatial data?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents:
............................................................................................................
15. What is the reference for the coordinate system used for spatial data?
Ain el Abd WGS1984 Other ..................
16. What spatial data or services do you need from the Municipal GIS Unit?
Locations and addresses Hydrological data
Land use data Investment data and municipal property
Administrative units Infrastructure and utility data
Elevation data Statistical data and reports
Measurements Online Geo-explorer
Printed maps Geo-Applications
Survey data Spatial analysis
Satellite images Other..................
125
17. Do spatial data need from other government agencies? What is this data?
Yes No
Data Provider Data Format Coordinates Reference
Required Data
GIS CAD Printed Map Service Satellite Image Other:.............
Ain el Abd
WGS 1984
GIS CAD Printed Map Service Satellite Image Other:.............
Ain el Abd
WGS 1984
18. How do you get spatial data?
Central database (server) Hard copy (maps and reports)
Digital (Storage device) E-mail
Other......................
19. What are the current difficulties related to spatial data?
Data not updated Difficulty in data access
Lack of statistical and non-spatial data Data is not available as a digital format
No integrated Data Data conflicting
Spatial data is inaccurate No metadata
Privacy and security Other.................
20. Are there applications for GIS?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents: .......................................................................................................
21. Are there geo-applications available to the public or government agencies?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents: .......................................................................................................
126
22. Does department need Geo-applications? For what purpose?
Data Sharing Map Services 3D Analysis
Real-time data Data Management Spatial Analysis
Decision making Improve customer services Support operations
Support planning Field mobile operations e-Services
23. Are there e-services linked to GIS?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents: .......................................................................................................
24. In your opinion, do departments and sections in the municipality need a
municipal SDI?
Yes No
Explanation / Documents: ......................................................................................................
25. In your opinion, how is the integration of spatial data in a unified structure of
SDI?
Use of standardized global standards Develop a dictionary of spatial data used
Standardization of database models Provide metadata
Develop an interoperable framework Standard data formats
A unified communications environment Other......................
26. Do you support holding more meetings and workshops among department
managers to discuss SDI policy and standards issues?
Yes No
Thanks for your response..
127
G. SWOT Questionnaire. (Translated into English)
Questionnaire link in Google: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdlgdMqwBS2PokkQfXfmgwKDWWbKqNdve3NhnareHDN9GIaiw/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1
1-What are the benefits of using GIS in the municipality?
Saving time and efforts Digitization and storing
Ease of access to information Improve work efficiency
The ability to visualize Production of maps and reports
Improving the quality of decision making Low cost
Analysis tools Other......
2-What defects do you see in the use of GIS's practices in the municipality?
Lack of awareness of GIS No integrated Data
High costs Spatial data is inaccurate
Lack of user experience Privacy and security
Lack of statistical and non-spatial data Difficulty in data access
Data, not updated Data is not available as a digital format
Lack of GIS specialists Data conflicting
Other......................
3-What opportunities can be built upon to improve the municipal GIS practices?
Availability of spatial data in a good status Increased awareness of the benefits of GIS
Availability of appropriate IT infrastructure Availability of GIS staff
Add-Value of GIS system A priority for upper management
National orientation towards governance and data sharing Availability of software
Maintaining the outputs of previous projects Other......................
SWOT QUESTIONNAIRE
GIS's Practices in The Northern Borders Municipality
128
4-What spatial data and services are you currently receiving from GIS unit in the municipality?
Locations and addresses Infrastructure and utilities data
Land use data Statistical data and reports
Elevation data Online Geo-explorer
Measurements Geo-Applications
Printed maps Spatial analysis
Investment data and municipal property GIS Training
5-How do you get spatial data from GIS unit in the municipality?
Central database (server) Hard copy (maps and reports)
Digital (Storage device) E-mail
Other...................
6-In your opinion, what are the challenges that hinder the improvement of GIS's practices in the
municipality?
Lack of an organizational structure for the GIS unit There is no fixed budget for GIS
Lack of an approved development plan Lack of specialized GIS staff
There is no exchange of data between internal departments There are no training Plan
Lack of IT infrastructure readiness No software available
There is no priority for upper management Other......................
There is no connection with other government agencies
Lack of awareness of the advantages of GIS
There are no standardization of data
129
7-In your opinion, what are the solutions and suggestions for improving the GIS's practices in the
municipality?
Develop an organizational structure and define roles Software update
Setting a defined development plan Approve a cost recovery policy
Provision of financial resources Standardization of data standards
Interoperability through applications Develop a training plan
Provide adequate GIS staff Other......................
Investment in IT infrastructure
Raising awareness of the advantages of GIS
Connection with other government agencies
Thanks for your response..
130
H. Arar City Geo-explorer and Municipal Geo-applications.
Web Mapping Application ( Arar city geo-explorer ).
Application of Municipal Investment Management.
131
I. ISO 19100 Geographic Information Standards
ISO 19100 Geographic Information Standards
The ISO/TC211 is responsible for the development of international standards in the
area of digital Geographic Information. The standards specify methods, tools, and
services for data management, acquiring, processing, analyzing, accessing,
presenting and transferring such data between different users, systems and locations.
These standards can be organised into themes for a Geographic Information
Technology Framework.
Architecture & Framework
ISO 19101 – Reference Model
ISO 19101-2 – Reference Model-Imagery
ISO 19103 – Conceptual Schema Language
Application of Management and Tracking of Municipal Projects.
132
ISO 19104 – Terminology
ISO 19105 – Conformance and Testing
ISO 19106 – Profiles
ISO 19146 – Cross-domain Vocabularies
ISO 19150 – Ontology
ISO 19155 – Place Identifier Architecture
Metadata, Data Content & Definitions
ISO 19110 – Methodology for Feature Cataloguing
ISO 19115 – Metadata
ISO 19115-2 – Metadata for Imagery and Gridded Data
ISO 19126 – Feature Concept Dictionaries and Registers
ISO 19131 – Data Product Specifications
ISO 19139 – Metadata XML Schema Implementation
ISO 19144-1 – Classification Systems-Part 1: Classification System Structure
ISO 19144-2 – Classification Systems-Part 2: Land Cover Classification System
Core Data Model
ISO 19107 – Spatial Schema
ISO 19108 – Temporal Schema
ISO 19109 – Rules for Application Schema
ISO 19115 – Metadata
ISO 19137 – Core Profile of the Spatial Schema
ISO 19141 – Schema for Moving Features
ISO 19149 – Rights Expression Language for Geographic Information
ISO 19152 – Land Administration Domain Model
ISO 19153 – Geospatial Digital Rights Management Reference Model
ISO 19156 – Observations & Measurements
Data Exchange Formats
ISO 19115 – Metadata
ISO 19115-2 – Metadata for Imagery and Gridded Data
ISO 19118 – Encoding
ISO 19136 – Geography Markup Language
133
Data Interchange and Services
ISO 19116 – Positioning Services
ISO 19117 – Portrayal
ISO 19119 – Services
ISO 19125-1 – Simple Feature Access-Common Architecture
ISO 19125-2 – Simple Feature Access-SQL Option
ISO 19128 – Web Map Server Interface
ISO 19132 – Location Based Service-Reference Model
ISO 19133 – Location Based Service-Tracking and Navigation
ISO 19134 – Location Based Services-Multimodal Routing and Navigation
ISO 19135 – Procedures for Item Registration
ISO 19142 – Web Feature Service
ISO 19143 – Filter Encoding
ISO 19145 – Registry of Representations of Geographic Point Locations
ISO 19147 – Location Based Services-Transfer Nodes
Data Quality
ISO 19113 – Quality Principles
ISO 19114 – Quality Evaluation Procedures
ISO 19115 – Metadata
ISO 19138 – Data Quality Measures
ISO 19157 – Data Quality
ISO 19158 – Quality Assurance of Data Supply
Spatial Referencing
ISO 19111 – Spatial Referencing by Coordinates
ISO 19112 – Spatial Referencing by Geographic Identifiers
ISO 19127 – Geodetic Codes and Parameters
ISO 19130 – Imagery Sensor Models for Geopositioning
ISO 19148 – Linear Referencing System
ISO 19151 – Dynamic Position Identification Scheme for Ubiquitous Spa
Imagery
ISO 19101-2 – Reference Model-Imagery
ISO 19115-2 – Metadata for Imagery and Gridded Data
ISO 19123 – Schema for Coverage Geometry and Functions
ISO 19129 – Imagery, Gridded and Coverage Data Framework
ISO 19130 – Imagery Sensor Models for Geopositioning
ISO 19159 – Calibration and Validation of Remote Sensing Imagery Sensors & Data
![UT Dallas CFA IRC Report - 2016 LUV [104644]](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/58edd01e1a28ab3d5a8b4739/ut-dallas-cfa-irc-report-2016-luv-104644.jpg)
